Redszone is a lot smarter than I am. I had no clue Patterson meant Corey and I guess Hairston is Jerry Hairston Jr?

reds44

03-03-2008, 08:34 PM

Yep, Dusty Baker is our manager.

guttle11

03-03-2008, 08:37 PM

Ugh.

Tom Servo

03-03-2008, 08:37 PM

Yep, Dusty Bakers is our manager.
Multiple Dustys!?! :eek:

Ltlabner

03-03-2008, 08:37 PM

Patterson was in the Cubs`--and especially Dusty Baker`s--doghouse after a disastrous 2005, which meant the Orioles were able buy low, for a change, picking him up for two players (Nate Spears and Carlos Perez) who turned in awful seasons for the Cubs` High-A team in Daytona. Patterson is a former favorite of scouts and statheads alike, but he turned out to be one of those players who, at age 20, was about as good as he was ever going to be. The idea that the average player improves through his twenties to age 27 is mistaken, as that trend really only applies to the average major leaguer. What distinguishes a typical major leaguer from a typical minor leaguer is the ability to learn and improve. Patterson doesn`t have that talent, but his basic skills are good enough to keep him in the majors for years to come. Just keep him away from left-handed pitchers.

From BP

Will M

03-03-2008, 08:40 PM

1. Fine moves by Wayne. Especially Patterson. How can anyone be upset about a player signed to a minor league deal?

2. Patterson gives the Reds a good defensive centerfielder. If his role is spot starting and late inning defense ( with Bruce to RF & Griffey to the bench ) then it is a plus move for the Reds.

3. For people to assume this means Bruce starts in AAA is a bit of a leap.

pedro

03-03-2008, 08:40 PM

AAA fodder I hope.

blumj

03-03-2008, 08:41 PM

Redszone is a lot smarter than I am. I had no clue Patterson meant Corey and I guess Hairston is Jerry Hairston Jr?
It must be Jerry, the other one's a Padre.

Ltlabner

03-03-2008, 08:41 PM

Acquired from the Cubs in the Phil Nevin bake sale, Hairston batted .206/.270/.253 between the two clubs. With his production plummeting like an elevator with a snapped cable, a career of similar longevity to his pop`s, Jerry Sr., seems increasingly unlikely. No speed, no power, no patience, no batting average, no defense, no point. Hairston was released after the season ended in order to make room for Mike Wood, an excellent indication of his current perceived value. Texas gave him a one-year contract to come back and try again.

Also from BP....FWIW

deltachi8

03-03-2008, 08:43 PM

AAA fodder I hope.

you and i both

savafan

03-03-2008, 08:45 PM

Gotta believe this means a trade is in the works involving an outfielder, maybe Freel?

Benihana

03-03-2008, 08:45 PM

I like this move. A lot. I've been an advocate of bringing Corey Patterson and/or Brian Anderson on board for some time now. Taking the cheapest flier possible (a minor league deal) on these guys can do nothing but help. Bruce's legs may not allow him to play CF (they may or they may not) but there's no harm in bringing in a high-upside guy like CP. Who knows, he could be this year's version of Carlos Pena (or more familiarily, Jose Guillen)- a former top prospect who finally puts it all together after a few stops along the way. Probably not, but who knows?

Hairston I care about much less, but I guess he offers some insurance/depth to a franchise with no middle infielders in the minors.

princeton

03-03-2008, 08:48 PM

Junior is the one holding Bruce back, not the CFer du jour

redsmetz

03-03-2008, 08:48 PM

Gotta believe this means a trade is in the works involving an outfielder, maybe Freel?

It could mean that, although I'm giving up on predicting whether a move means there's a trade brewing. I suspect these are cogs in the machine that could allow a subsequent trade, but I'd leave it at them signing on to minor league deals because nothing was materializing and it gives us some flexibility should something come down the pike. How's that for equivocating?

fearofpopvol1

03-03-2008, 08:48 PM

Hairston?? :( Let's just keep bringing in players into the organization with PED clouds over their heads.

Patterson isn't a bad idea, especially for a minor league contract. I wonder if it means the Reds are trying to get rid of Freel? Nah, they'll send Bruce to AAA and bring in Patterson.

pedro

03-03-2008, 08:49 PM

Could we see Phillips at SS and Hairston at 2B if Hairston has a great spring?

There's a better chance Mr. Red will land on the moon.

redsmetz

03-03-2008, 08:51 PM

Folks keep wanting to move Brandon Phillips over to short and the club continually shows no inclination to do that - it's a regular Redszone mantra.

princeton

03-03-2008, 08:53 PM

no baseclogger, that Patterson

Outshined_One

03-03-2008, 08:54 PM

*Rubs hands together*

Good...good...

Benihana

03-03-2008, 08:54 PM

There's a better chance Mr. Red will land on the moon.

I don't think so either, but remember who's managing this team.

pedro

03-03-2008, 08:55 PM

I don't think so either, but remember who's managing this team.

"Dusty" something or other...

never heard of the guy.

*BaseClogger*

03-03-2008, 08:58 PM

no baseclogger, that Patterson

huh? :confused:

princeton

03-03-2008, 09:01 PM

huh? :confused:

if the two of you were to shake hands, kaboom

BCubb2003

03-03-2008, 09:05 PM

I wonder what historians would rank as the best minor league deal ever.

mth123

03-03-2008, 09:07 PM

Patterson is a LH Hitter. Perhaps there is something to the Hatte trade talk. Patterson offers better utilization on defense as a bench player. I think this is worse news for Dickerson who seemingly made a good impression than it is for Bruce. With Dickerson and Patterson available as LH Hitters, I could see Hatte being shipped out. I hope the Reds get a real relief pitcher for him if so. Patterson's mediocre power may play well in GABP.

Highlifeman21

03-03-2008, 09:11 PM

Gotta believe this means a trade is in the works involving an outfielder, maybe Freel?

Don't tease me.

Now that Patterson's in camp, that means one of, if not both, Hopper and Freel should be out the door. Although I have this lingering feeling that Hopper will be staying around, like that nasty case of athlete's foot that you just can't cure.

We've now created a surplus. Time to move some of our surplus in order to address our weaknesses.

NC Reds

03-03-2008, 09:12 PM

Yuck to both signings. Hopper is capable of being the defensive replacement late in games.

Patterson has no business taking AB's from Bruce this spring. I'm disgusted.

Will M

03-03-2008, 09:15 PM

I think this is worse news for Dickerson who seemingly made a good impression than it is for Bruce.

I thought the same thing.

However, if Wayne can add major league talent cheaply then he should do it. Depth is good.

mth123

03-03-2008, 09:16 PM

Yuck to both signings. Hopper is capable of being the defensive replacement late in games.

Patterson has no business taking AB's from Bruce this spring. I'm disgusted.

Not sure. Hopper can't carry Patterson's glove IMO.

Highlifeman21

03-03-2008, 09:16 PM

Yuck to both signings. Hopper is capable of being the defensive replacement late in games.

Patterson has no business taking AB's from Bruce this spring. I'm disgusted.

Hopper is average at best defensively. In no way, shape or form, should he be the late in games defensive replacement.

Bruce is dealing with a day-to-day quad strain. The only ABs getting stolen in ST now are from Freel or Hopper, and that's not a bad thing.

Let Patterson prove himself, one way or another. He'll either prove he's still got it (defensively, and probably not so much offensively), or he'll prove that we're out a little bit on a minor league contract.

Competition is a good thing, especially when you have question marks waiting for a positive answer.

savafan

03-03-2008, 09:18 PM

I wonder what historians would rank as the best minor league deal ever.

Well, the Reds minor league deal with Jose Guillen worked out pretty well, and netted us Harang.

Dmitri Young's minor league contract with Washinnati last season was a pretty good steal as well.

princeton

03-03-2008, 09:23 PM

I wonder what historians would rank as the best minor league deal ever.

Louisiana purchase

KronoRed

03-03-2008, 09:24 PM

I can't see what possible good can come from signing these two, are we recreating the 2005 cubs?

reds44

03-03-2008, 09:30 PM

I would rather have Dickerson on the roster. I can say for sure Dickerson would post an OBP above .300, and he does everything else just as well or better than Patterson does.

westofyou

03-03-2008, 09:32 PM

I wonder what historians would rank as the best minor league deal ever.

February 1957, Chicago Cubs owner Phil Wrigley sold the Angels and their ballpark to Walter O'Malley, the Brooklyn Dodgers' owner, for $3,000,000 and the rights to the Dodgers' Texas League franchise in Fort Worth. This secured territorial rights to Los Angeles for the Dodgers, enabling their move to the city later that year.

GAC

03-03-2008, 09:32 PM

I wonder what historians would rank as the best minor league deal ever.

Its two guys signed to minor league contracts. They are the ones who have to come in and prove that they can play at the ML level when they didn't do that on a consistent basis prior.

Too much over analyzing and "reading into" going on.

PuffyPig

03-03-2008, 09:37 PM

Louisiana purchase

I rank "Seward's Folly" better than that.

Raisor

03-03-2008, 09:39 PM

huh? :confused:

You see, Dusty doesn't like it when hitters get on base but then aren't able to get home. Patterson wouldn't have that problem since he so rarely gets on base.

reds44

03-03-2008, 09:41 PM

Quotes from Krivsky:

"Patterson will come in and compete for the center field job," Reds GM Wayne Krivsky said. "Hairston is another versatile guy that can play infield/outfield. Patterson is 28 and Hairston is 31. They've got some experience, but we gave them no guarantees. They'll come in and compete."

These numbers are just ugly:

Patterson, a left-handed power-speed hitter, hit .269 last season in 461 at-bats with the Orioles. He had eight home runs with 45 RBI and 37 steals in 46 attempts. His on-base percentage was .304. He really came on after the All-Star break, hitting .313 when he became a full-time starter.

In 2006 Patterson hit .276 with 16 homers and 53 RBI with 45 steals in 54 attempts. His on-base percentage was .314.

Patterson is a former blue-chip prospect who came up with the Cubs and made his major-league debut as a 21-year-old in 2000. In his career, he has 168 steals, 94 homers and 329 RBI and is a .258 hitter.

Hairston, a right-handed hitter, also has Cubs ties, playing with them in 2005 and 2006.

He hit .189 last season with Texas in 159 at-bats. He played all the outfield spots and shortstop, second base and third base. He's a lifetime .253 hitter with a .325 on-base percentage in 2,534 at-bats since 1998 with 112 career steals.

The fact that Hairston has played SS in the past gives him a shot to make the team. I really don't want CP being our starting CFer, because we all know that means he leads off. Just ugly.

On Lofton:

"I'd rather not talk about individual guys," Krivsky said. "But we're pleased with the guys we have in right now."

Kc61

03-03-2008, 09:42 PM

Junior is the one holding Bruce back, not the CFer du jour

Thank you. This is the point, exactly.

Jay Bruce will seamlessly replace Griffey in right field at some point this season and stay there for a number of years.

Patterson will likely platoon in center with Freel or Hopper. With players of that type, a platoon makes sense to give the batter some additional advantage.

Raisor

03-03-2008, 09:51 PM

Goodness,

I don't want to be an alarmist, but I'm wondering how many times we're going to see

1. Patterson CF
2. Castro SS

on the lineup card.

Heavens to mergatroid!

Cyclone792

03-03-2008, 09:54 PM

Goodness,

I don't want to be an alarmist, but I'm wondering how many times we're going to see

1. Patterson CF
2. Castro SS

on the lineup card.

Heavens to mergatroid!

In a game that Josh Fogg starts and both Stanton and Majewski relieve in.

The Reds have had a knack recently for acquiring and keeping players that I hate. This latest series of signings is just another notch on the list.

Its two guys signed to minor league contracts. They are the ones who have to come in and prove that they can play at the ML level when they didn't do that on a consistent basis prior.

Too much over analyzing and "reading into" going on.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times. The problem with signing like these is that eventually these players always get a shot on the 25 man roster. I'd much rather see unknowns getting a shot then the same old retreads.

savafan

03-03-2008, 09:54 PM

Goodness,

I don't want to be an alarmist, but I'm wondering how many times we're going to see

1. Patterson CF
2. Castro SS

on the lineup card.

Heavens to mergatroid!

Not enough for this masochistic fan. If you're going to be bad, be laughably bad!

Raisor

03-03-2008, 09:55 PM

In a game that Josh Fogg starts and both Stanton and Majewski relieve in.

The Reds have had a knack recently for acquiring and keeping players that I hate. This latest series of signings is just another notch on the list.

Somebody put a cow bell on Womack and Tony Batista, just so we can keep an eye on them.

Ltlabner

03-03-2008, 09:58 PM

Nothing to be alarmed about here. I've been assured that Dusty does not like to block the progress of younger players with old-retreads and doesn't like to give away tons of at-bats to offensive black holes.

reds44

03-03-2008, 09:58 PM

Goodness,

I don't want to be an alarmist, but I'm wondering how many times we're going to see

I'll worry about it when Wayne drops someone from th 40 man to add Patterson.

As for Hairston? Have a nice summer in Louisville.

Benihana

03-03-2008, 10:06 PM

Color me way too optimistic, but I could foresee Patterson putting up some decent numbers in GAB. Not saying it will happen, but I could see him being a 20/20 guy with a .260-.270 BA, or in other words, a Brandon Phillips-lite (good defense and all.)

I'd say it's worth a minor league contract. What in the world do we have to lose- Norris Hopper plate appearances?

klw

03-03-2008, 10:07 PM

from mlbtraderumors.com

Reds Sign Corey Patterson
According to John Fay of the Cincinnati Enquirer, the Reds have signed 28 year-old center fielder Corey Patterson to a minor league deal. Patterson, a Boras client, makes for a surprising bargain with a dash of upside. He happened to reach free agency in an offseason with a center field surplus. He's reunited with former Cubs manager Dusty Baker, who some say mishandled Patterson at times. Fay believes this takes Kenny Lofton off the table for Cincy.

The Reds are calling it a center field competition, but Patterson will probably get the gig. This will allow the Reds to keep Jay Bruce in the minors until June and delay his future free agency by a year.

The Reds also inked another former Cub, Jerry Hairston Jr. He may have a hard time making the team, but his versatility could help.

edabbs44

03-03-2008, 10:17 PM

Just more ammo to the "This FO has no plan" argument.

flyer85

03-03-2008, 10:20 PM

at thi point I have no idea what the Patterson signing means ... guess we are going to have to wait.

remdog

03-03-2008, 10:23 PM

Apparently this is what Dusty meant when he said that he could 'attract some players'. :rolleyes:

These two guys don't even belong in a major league camp as verified by the fact that we're 10 days into ST and no one wanted them. Then the Reds and Dusty came along. :censored:

Rem

WMR

03-03-2008, 10:23 PM

Color me way too optimistic, but I could foresee Patterson putting up some decent numbers in GAB. Not saying it will happen, but I could see him being a 20/20 guy with a .260-.270 BA, or in other words, a Brandon Phillips-lite (good defense and all.)

I'd say it's worth a minor league contract. What in the world do we have to lose- Norris Hopper plate appearances?

20/20 out of Patterson?!?! :eek:

How many ABs do you foresee him getting to create that kind of production?

Red in Chicago

03-03-2008, 10:30 PM

Apparently this is what Dusty meant when he said that he could 'attract some players'. :rolleyes:

These two guys don't even belong in a major league camp as verified by the fact that we're 10 days into ST and no one wanted them. Then the Reds and Dusty came along. :censored:

Rem

I loathe Dusty. I loathe Corey. I loathe Hairston. Yet, I just bought three tickets to a game in May...guess I'll never learn:rolleyes:

savafan

03-03-2008, 10:35 PM

This should excite those three Reggie Taylor fans in Cincinnati.

remdog

03-03-2008, 10:37 PM

I loathe Dusty. I loathe Corey. I loathe Hairston. Yet, I just bought three tickets to a game in May...guess I'll never learn:rolleyes:

Well, when they said 'south side' they didn't necessarily mean Chicago. :p:

Rem

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 10:37 PM

And I'm called alarmist when I point out that the most ballyhooed prospect perhaps in Reds' history has an injury history that's been kept under wraps.

How exactly do these two players hurt this team in a non-contending year?

WMR

03-03-2008, 10:39 PM

Apparently this is what Dusty meant when he said that he could 'attract some players'. :rolleyes:

These two guys don't even belong in a major league camp as verified by the fact that we're 10 days into ST and no one wanted them. Then the Reds and Dusty came along. :censored:

Rem

Attract 'em like flies to @#$%. ;)

Aronchis

03-03-2008, 10:41 PM

Dusty: AWWWWWWWWW!!!!!! Jay, your quad looks awfull, your out of shape aren't you kid?(winks at Bruce)
Jay: What? I worked out all win-------
Dusty: Now now son, the pain must be awfull, we will have to send you to AAA so you can play rightfield and not have to run on that awfull injury.
Jay:???????????????.........
Dusty: We just signed Rally Time Jr. and have Eric Dickersons cousin hanging around along with Farney and Hopper, we will be fine.
Jay:(Thinks to himself). I guess hitting 600 in spring training isn't good enough.......

edabbs44

03-03-2008, 10:43 PM

And I'm called alarmist when I point out that the most ballyhooed prospect perhaps in Reds' history has an injury history that's been kept under wraps.

How exactly do these two players hurt this team in a non-contending year?

Non-contending year? That's news to the Reds front office.

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 10:45 PM

Non-contending year? That's news to the Reds front office.

What they don't know won't hurt him.

GADawg

03-03-2008, 10:47 PM

I can't see what possible good can come from signing these two, are we recreating the 2005 cubs?

quick who was better...those Cubs or the Reds....I wanna know how we're gonna fare against the Nats this year!!

WMR

03-03-2008, 10:47 PM

EXACTLY. The Reds stated intentions often appear to be in direct contrast to the moves they make.

I heard Bob C. with my own ears on Friday tell Doc on WLW how the Reds planned on contending this season.

fearofpopvol1

03-03-2008, 10:51 PM

Looking closer at Patterson's numbers...I think he'd make a fine bench player with some occasional starts, but I just don't see having the room for him on the roster unless Hopper or Freel goes or if they finally decide to pull the plug on Castro. With or without Bruce, somebody else has to go.

edabbs44

03-03-2008, 10:52 PM

EXACTLY. The Reds stated intentions often appear to be in direct contrast to the moves they make.

I heard Bob C. with my own ears on Friday tell Doc on WLW how the Reds planned on contending this season.

Bob C. will find out really fast that this team isn't contending. That's when the ax will fall and Walt will be taking the wheel.

That's my prediction.

edabbs44

03-03-2008, 10:52 PM

Now, in the grand scheme, I do like the move. Patterson is exactly what this team needs on the bench.

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 10:52 PM

EXACTLY. The Reds stated intentions often appear to be in direct contrast to the moves they make.

I heard Bob C. with my own ears on Friday tell Doc on WLW how the Reds planned on contending this season.

I don't know, are you being sarcastic?

The Reds have to know they slammed on the brakes when they didn't get a starter. That's got to be damage control speak by Bob.

WMR

03-03-2008, 10:58 PM

Sarcastic how?

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 11:01 PM

Sarcastic how?

That Bob was really "serious" about contention.

WMR

03-03-2008, 11:04 PM

Of course he wasn't being sarcastic. hehe. Don't think Bob would ever joke about something like that.

No way, he was totally, 100&#37; serious.

remdog

03-03-2008, 11:05 PM

And I'm called alarmist when I point out that the most ballyhooed prospect perhaps in Reds' history has an injury history that's been kept under wraps.

Please document those injuries that have 'been kept under wraps'.

Rem

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 11:07 PM

Please document those injuries that have 'been kept under wraps'.

Rem

I'm simply going on what Dusty has gone on record as saying. If you choose to believe he's lying, that's your prerogative.

flyer85

03-03-2008, 11:14 PM

I guess WK/Dusty have lots of options. Now they just need to listen to me. :D

remdog

03-03-2008, 11:14 PM

I'm simply going on what Dusty has gone on record as saying. If you choose to believe he's lying, that's your prerogative.

Where did Dusty go on record as saying that and why would you accept his word for it since you are the original 'doubting Thomas'?

If dusty did say that I would expect you, of all people, to be on his back about just what and where those supposed injuries were.

I'm wondering and asking, can anyone out there document the supposed injuries that Jay Bruce has suffered since he signed a professional contract that would label him as 'injury prone'???

Jay Bruce has been discussed a lot here and on other boards and I've never seen him described as 'injury prone.'

Rem

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 11:18 PM

Where did Dusty go on record as saying that and why would you accept his word for it since you are the original 'doubting Thomas'?

If dusty did say that I would expect you, of all people, to be on his back about just what and where those supposed injuries were.

I'm wondering and asking, can anyone out there document the supposed injuries that Jay Bruce has suffered since he signed a professional contract that would label him as 'injury prone'???

Jay Bruce has been discussed a lot here and on other boards and I've never seen him described as 'injury prone.'

Rem

"It's a couple of days," Baker said. "The one thing that makes yo a little weary is he's had this a couple of times and he's 20 years old. You've got to find a way to stop these minor leg problems before they become major. Its rare you have them this young. It makes you a little apprehensive as far as being a centerfielder, because in his career, that's a lot of running out there. We'll figure something out."

Why would Dusty make that up? If anything, he has a motivation to suppress that kind of information, not foment it.

It's all about who's delivering the message. As I said if it were some journalist looking to fill up a column or something, sure, I'd have every reason to doubt their word, but Dusty has given me no cause to think he's just making stuff up.

kbrake

03-03-2008, 11:30 PM

Not sure why people are upset. Patterson could be a huge help to this bench, someone that can play some good defense in center for a change. As for Hairston, not sure I see the point of that one.

Always Red

03-03-2008, 11:39 PM

Well, minor league deals are a good thing.

...for depth.

But WK has a history of bringing guys in and putting them right to work.

I don't see how either one of these guys improve this team. I'd play Bruce, Freel and Hopper (in that order) above Patterson. And Hairston is worse than everyone except Castro, but then again, so is everyone else.

If these guys are brought in to provide competition, well then that's good.

If they are brought in to go to war starting in April, well, then that's 2 strikes against Dusty, in my book at least.

remdog

03-03-2008, 11:42 PM

.....Dusty has given me no cause to think he's just making stuff up.

Where has he given you cause to think he actually knows the facts?

Again, I ask, can someone, anyone, out there document the supposed injuries that are now labeling Jay Bruce as 'injury prone'?

Anyone that follows the minors closely? Doug?

Rem

RedEye

03-03-2008, 11:46 PM

Well, I think I'd prefer Patterson in CF over Farney or Hopper. At least he can play credible defense.

Always Red

03-03-2008, 11:49 PM

Well, I think I'd prefer Patterson in CF over Farney or Hopper. At least he can play credible defense.

Yes, Cory Patterson, with the career .298 OBP.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/patteco01.shtml

Just perfect. :eek:

Go ahead and bat him leadoff!

Falls City Beer

03-03-2008, 11:52 PM

It's pretty clear that Bruce is headed to AAA and Patterson et al are this year's CF.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 12:00 AM

What are the ramifications for the OF throughout the ORG? Who gets blocked now? Who gets released at the very bottom?

Who wants to set the over under on how many times Hairston is shuttled between Cincy and Louisville this year?

pedro

03-04-2008, 12:27 AM

Who wants to set the over under on how many times Hairston is shuttled between Cincy and Louisville this year?

I'm going to pick the under, no what matter the line is set at.

pedro

03-04-2008, 12:28 AM

Here's my take.

I'll be very disappointed if Patterson is the Opening day CF and even more disappointed if he gets consistent AB's at the top of the order unless he really makes a leap in OPB, which is pretty unlikely. But if he's just organizational depth, well then it's not bad move. Griffey is fragile and it would be nice to move Freel if the opportunity came up. One thing's for sure the Reds have added a lot of depth this off season, and though much of it is marginal, it is something that they never did during Lindner's tenure. Although past history makes us justifiably skeptical of these types of moves as they used to be viewed as actual answers to problems on the major league roster, not just organizational depth, I'm going to wait until those wrong answers are turned in on the final before I hand out grades.

M2

03-04-2008, 12:46 AM

I figure Patterson's the favorite for CF on opening day. Honestly, I don't think too many would complain if Dusty put together a lineup that looked something like this (btw, this isn't exactly how I'd order them, but I think there's an off chance Dusty might try it):

Granted, it would get a little ugly with Gonzalez back in the fold, but it's not a horrible starting point. At some juncture I figure Jr. gets injured and Bruce steps in too. Patterson really could be a sleeper for the Reds. He's certainly got to be motivated at the moment given that he's only gotten a minor league contract. He could have himself a career year (something like a .333 OB and .500 SLG with 40 SB and top notch defense). I'm not saying it's likely, but, given the team's defensive needs I think it's worth shaking the bottle to see if there's any lightning in there.

Blitz Dorsey

03-04-2008, 12:52 AM

Hopefully Hairston gets cut just so I don't have to listen to George Grande mispronounce his name as "Harriston" all season.

I like landing Corey Patterson on a no-risk minor league contract. I disagree with those that think he will be the Opening Day CF. I think he will be a nice reserve outfielder and we know he's someone with a lot of talent. There's nothing not to like about that move.

GADawg

03-04-2008, 12:59 AM

[QUOTE=Blitz Dorsey;1563507]Hopefully Hairston gets cut just so I don't have to listen to George Grande mispronounce his name as "Harriston" all season.

Now that's funny! One of a long list of Pet Grande's(replaced Peeve's along time ago) that I have....glad I'm not alone. Me and Richie SexTon thank you.

SteelSD

03-04-2008, 01:08 AM

Of course we know that Baker has managed both of these out machines before. For anyone interested, here's how often Baker had each high in the lineup:

To be fair, Patterson hit 1st or 2nd in only 8.36% of his 2003 PA, but that was because he was hitting third (yes, third) 46.69% of the time. But take a look at 2005. Combined, Hairston and Patterson combined for 487 Plate Appearances in the leadoff slot. And we wonder why that slot produced a combined .299 OBP for Baker's 2005 Cubs team.

Throughout Baker's reign in Chicago, that team produced the following OBP numbers from the leadoff slot:

That's some pretty impressive work there. Good to see how dramatically the "base clogging" dropped off after the first year of Baker's tenure. So how did the team do with not clogging the bases? After all, such a team should be able to run at will.

2003-2006 Cubs Stolen Base Success Rates:

2003: 70%
2004: 70%
2005: 63%
2006: 71%

Wow, Baker. Way to give away more Outs. I mean, that's really impressive considering that the top of your order players have been there due to nothing more than speed. Yet your most recent teams haven't been able to do as much as break even on steals over your tenure. Action for action's sake. Or is it that you want to run players into Outs in order to free up the bases you don't want clogged?

There's simply no reason to bring in either Corey Patterson or Jerry Hairston Jr. at this point. And there's absolutely no reason to position that a dud like Patterson will "compete" for the CF job. These guys shouldn't have been touched by the Reds at any price and the risk is that they'll actually be used at some point. And knowing Baker's usage patterns, it's quite likely he'll use them in all the wrong ways if given the chance.

Again, ewww...

WVPacman

03-04-2008, 01:09 AM

Im just throwing this out there but with the signing of Patterson do you guys think this means Jr won't last the whole season here.

pedro

03-04-2008, 01:10 AM

I figure Patterson's the favorite for CF on opening day. Honestly, I don't think too many would complain if Dusty put together a lineup that looked something like this (btw, this isn't exactly how I'd order them, but I think there's an off chance Dusty might try it):

Granted, it would get a little ugly with Gonzalez back in the fold, but it's not a horrible starting point. At some juncture I figure Jr. gets injured and Bruce steps in too. Patterson really could be a sleeper for the Reds. He's certainly got to be motivated at the moment given that he's only gotten a minor league contract. He could have himself a career year (something like a .333 OB and .500 SLG with 40 SB and top notch defense). I'm not saying it's likely, but, given the team's defensive needs I think it's worth shaking the bottle to see if there's any lightning in there.

If they recognize the offensive player that Patterson is and bat him eighth I at least will understand the motivation, even if I don't like it. He is supposedly a significant upgrade defensively over any other player the Reds have in CF. Although BP rated him -6 last year and has him at 0 for 2008.

Blitz Dorsey

03-04-2008, 01:16 AM

Im just throwing this out there but with the signing of Patterson do you guys think this means Jr won't last the whole season here.

I don't think he'll get traded, but I like stocking up on depth in the OF when one of your starters is Ken Griffey Jr. He is always on the verge of being out for long periods of time it seems. He's been better (more durable) the last two years which makes me think he's due for one of those years when he gets about 200 ABs. Hope I'm wrong. But that's another reason I like the C-Patt signing is that he provides immediate depth at the least. Insurance in case we have a rash of injuries. One thing that will drive Reds fans crazy about him is that he has no clue how to take a walk, but for a minor league contract what do you expect? This is about as good as it gets for a no-risk move a couple weeks into spring training.

Blitz Dorsey

03-04-2008, 01:21 AM

[QUOTE=Blitz Dorsey;1563507]Hopefully Hairston gets cut just so I don't have to listen to George Grande mispronounce his name as "Harriston" all season.

Now that's funny! One of a long list of Pet Grande's(replaced Peeve's along time ago) that I have....glad I'm not alone. Me and Richie SexTon thank you.

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed. And out of curiosity, is Grande's refusal to say the word "damn" when he plugs FSN's nightly sports show on your list? I have many Pet Grandes myself.

M2

03-04-2008, 01:22 AM

If they recognize the offensive player that Patterson is and bat him eighth I at least will understand the motivation, even if I don't like it.

I keep going back to what I said when the Reds hired Baker. I'm sure they're going to do a ton of things with which I disagree, but there is the chance that, unlike with recent incarnations of this club, it might work.

wheels

03-04-2008, 01:22 AM

Yowch.

We'd better hope that those younguns manning the bump kick into gear sooner than reality would generally dictate.

I can see the runs dwindling by the minute.

WMR

03-04-2008, 01:23 AM

I figure Patterson's the favorite for CF on opening day. Honestly, I don't think too many would complain if Dusty put together a lineup that looked something like this (btw, this isn't exactly how I'd order them, but I think there's an off chance Dusty might try it):

Granted, it would get a little ugly with Gonzalez back in the fold, but it's not a horrible starting point. At some juncture I figure Jr. gets injured and Bruce steps in too. Patterson really could be a sleeper for the Reds. He's certainly got to be motivated at the moment given that he's only gotten a minor league contract. He could have himself a career year (something like a .333 OB and .500 SLG with 40 SB and top notch defense). I'm not saying it's likely, but, given the team's defensive needs I think it's worth shaking the bottle to see if there's any lightning in there.

Sorry, M2, as much as it kills me, I think if Patterson is in the line-up starting, he will be leading off. Hope I'm wrong.

WVPacman

03-04-2008, 01:24 AM

I don't think he'll get traded, but I like stocking up on depth in the OF when one of your starters is Ken Griffey Jr. He is always on the verge of being out for long periods of time it seems. He's been better (more durable) the last two years which makes me think he's due for one of those years when he gets about 200 ABs. Hope I'm wrong. But that's another reason I like the C-Patt signing is that he provides immediate depth at the least. Insurance in case we have a rash of injuries. One thing that will drive Reds fans crazy about him is that he has no clue how to take a walk, but for a minor league contract what do you expect? This is about as good as it gets for a no-risk move a couple weeks into spring training.

I agree completly!!

Caveat Emperor

03-04-2008, 01:30 AM

And to think, yesterday my fear was that the Reds were seriously considering making Norris Hopper the everyday CF...

At this point, I guess I just have to hold out hope that the Reds are at least smart enough to platoon Patterson with either Freel or Hopper. Patterson is an Out-Machine on his best days, but against LHP over the last 3 years, he's positively atrocious: .268 OBP / .365 SLG. Putting Corey in as the everyday CF would cost this team runs, plain and simple.

Dusty Baker is nothing if not reliable -- he clearly didn't want to go into the season without a trusted, veteran player that fits HIS mold of a CF/leadoff hitter. Instead of using the talent here, he went out and had the team acquire someone awful to make him feel better.

GADawg

03-04-2008, 01:33 AM

[QUOTE=GADawg;1563512]

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed. And out of curiosity, is Grande's refusal to say the word "damn" when he plugs FSN's nightly sports show on your list? I have many Pet Grandes myself.

yes, A lister. Makes me wonder what Grande will do and/or say when Kosuke Fukudome comes to bat for the Cubbies this season! BTW i thought that was the dome the Yomuri Giants or the Chunichi Dragons play in!:D

KronoRed

03-04-2008, 02:32 AM

I'd say it's worth a minor league contract. What in the world do we have to lose- Norris Hopper plate appearances?

I would take Hopper over Patterson every day of the week.

This is sort of a Bowden move but it's not in the least surprising, personally I don't even want Patterson in Louisville taking at bats from Bruce and Dickerson

pedro

03-04-2008, 02:49 AM

I keep going back to what I said when the Reds hired Baker. I'm sure they're going to do a ton of things with which I disagree, but there is the chance that, unlike with recent incarnations of this club, it might work.

I just hope if they are insistent on giving this thing a try they are willing to cut their losses quickly in the highly probable case that it doesn't work.

I do kind of like that they're bringing in guys to challenge the youngsters I just hope they have the fortitude to cut bait on some of the filler if they have a youngster kicking down the door. I would really hope that by mid season players like Josh Fogg and Jeremy Affeldt are able to be replaced by better, younger in-house options, but I'm sort of kind of OK with having them around for the kids to have to beat out. As long as they get the chance anyway.

Ron Madden

03-04-2008, 04:02 AM

Anytime a Club spends (ANY) money on bad players that money is wasted.

Every year we have folks sayin' "It's just a minor league deal". Or "It's worth a shot, you never know". "After all, how much playing time will he get"?

I don't like these kind of moves at all. Give the kids a chance!

:(

mth123

03-04-2008, 08:09 AM

I'm probably going to be banned for this, but I kind of like it. This is a gold glove caliber defender (remember those) for CF with real speed that is successful at an acceptable rate who has just the type of middling power to get quite a boost from playing games in the NL Central at GABP. I don't really want him to block Bruce, but Patterson is better than Hopper and offers different strengths than Freel (for a lot less money) and is much more effective on the bases. I like Dickerson, but lets remember, if Dickerson really pans out, he'll probably be pretty similar to what Corey Patterson is now. For a minor league deal, this is a no brainer IMO. I just think he should push Hatte off the roster and into a trade for a reliever. The Reds didn't really need another LH OF, but one who can play defense and run is more valuable as a LH Bat for the bench than a superfluous LH 1B.

I don't see any reason for Hairston.

Jpup

03-04-2008, 08:33 AM

you guys got what you wanted. :bang:

Wayne Krivsky should be fired immediately.

redsmetz

03-04-2008, 08:52 AM

Anytime a Club spends (ANY) money on bad players that money is wasted.

Every year we have folks sayin' "It's just a minor league deal". Or "It's worth a shot, you never know". "After all, how much playing time will he get"?

I don't like these kind of moves at all. Give the kids a chance!

:(

I'd be curious to know how many players in recent years who came to camp on a "minor league deal" who made the club and actually got significant playing time. I'm working right now, but I'll take a look at recent rosters. I think it's not many, but I could be wrong.

I agree with mth123, Patterson isn't a bad move and could help fill a need as an extra outfielder.

Okay, I took a couple of minutes and looked at the last two seasons rosters. As best I can tell, last year we had only Mark Bellhorn and Victor Santos who were signed to minor league deals and played some with the ML club. Bellhorn played in 16 games, Santos appeared in 30 games. I wanted to include Chad Moeller, but as I recall, he was signed to a ML contract. Interestingly, both Moeller and Santos had their contracts sold, as opposed to releasing them outright.

In 2006, I see only Quinton McCracken and Andy Abad having been signed to Minor League deals who ultimately played some with the team that year. I don't see Chris Michalak's transaction noted, but I think he was signed to a minor league deal too, although I don't recall him being in the ML camp.

RFS62

03-04-2008, 09:30 AM

I figure Patterson's the favorite for CF on opening day. Honestly, I don't think too many would complain if Dusty put together a lineup that looked something like this (btw, this isn't exactly how I'd order them, but I think there's an off chance Dusty might try it):

Granted, it would get a little ugly with Gonzalez back in the fold, but it's not a horrible starting point. At some juncture I figure Jr. gets injured and Bruce steps in too. Patterson really could be a sleeper for the Reds. He's certainly got to be motivated at the moment given that he's only gotten a minor league contract. He could have himself a career year (something like a .333 OB and .500 SLG with 40 SB and top notch defense). I'm not saying it's likely, but, given the team's defensive needs I think it's worth shaking the bottle to see if there's any lightning in there.

Excellent post.

traderumor

03-04-2008, 09:38 AM

Here's some things that I think make some of the consternation unfounded:

1) Dusty mentioned Patterson weeks ago. The Reds just now signed him, likely holding out so the guy doesn't cost a 40 spot. If someone else bit before the Reds, oh well, they seemed to be saying. No one else did, so Patterson took the minor league deal. Patterson has had spots, so the "wasted money on bad players" angle doesn't really work, either, because he is worth something to Louisville and as an injury spot starter. Bad players cannot do anything well. Patterson can do some things very well, like chase fly balls. That person can be a valuable backup in AAA and on a bench. He has value, esp. warranting a minor league contract.

2) If the Reds really intended to bring in Patterson with the intent of handing him the OD CF job, they would have signed him earlier and put him on the 40 man. If he performs and makes the team, what is there to gripe about? Blocking a youngster? Blocking Jay Bruce, who may be able to be Josh Hamiltoned (who was not in the OD lineup last year as a game of Strat with actual lineups reminded me).

I know the years of bad decisions have worn on people, but choosing the dumbest path and figuring that is what the Reds are thinking gets very old reading (from the same posters, I might add). Cynicism is sometimes founded, but it is not always warranted.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 09:39 AM

This team needs to devote some attention to run prevention, and OF defense is currently a major weakness. Having Griffey and Dunn on the corners makes the OF defense almost laughable. Ultimately, the plan should be to have Bruce on a corner and a real flychaser in CF. I don't have a problem with giving Patterson a shot -- while the team tries to develop Dickerson and Stubbs -- platooning him with Hopper, I assume. Meanwhile, Bruce goes to RF in Louisville, learns the position and waits for Griffey to get hurt.

With a bunch of young pitchers trying to break into the league, it'll ease their transition if the team behind them isn't hugely porous, and I think Patterson could help on that front. And the fact remains he still has some upside on offense.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 09:42 AM

Setting aside the PECOTA of Jay Brice...

Corey Patterson: .268/.307.402
Chris Dickerson: .240/.319/.408

Looks to me like we already had one.

edabbs44

03-04-2008, 09:53 AM

Setting aside the PECOTA of Jay Brice...

Corey Patterson: .268/.307.402
Chris Dickerson: .240/.319/.408

Looks to me like we already had one.

If PECOTA was an exact measurement of the actual performance of this year, then yeah.

But it's not.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 09:56 AM

If PECOTA was an exact measurement of the actual performance of this year, then yeah.

But it's not.

Well, it's the most accurate prediction system out there. Find me a better one and I'll happily use it.

The point stands in any case. Patterson is not significantly different than the bevy of options we already have.

edabbs44

03-04-2008, 10:07 AM

Well, it's the most accurate prediction system out there. Find me a better one and I'll happily use it.

The point stands in any case. Patterson is not significantly different than the bevy of options we already have.

It might great for predicting stats for fun, but I wouldn't base roster decisions solely on it.

As a tiebreaker, I'll take the guy with the track record in the majors over the guy with no track record any day.

REDREAD

03-04-2008, 10:34 AM

And I'm called alarmist when I point out that the most ballyhooed prospect perhaps in Reds' history has an injury history that's been kept under wraps.

How exactly do these two players hurt this team in a non-contending year?

That's my point as well.

I think Wayne should be praised for this move.

Patterson is quality depth at AAA. There's more to baseball than OBP. He's a nice bench player on a cheap contract. If Bruce can't beat Patterson out for the job, then Bruce doesn't deserve to play. Likewise, I don't have a problem at all with Patterson starting over Freel or Hopper. At least Patterson is a legitimate CF glove. He's only 28. Maybe this minor league contract will be the wake up call to get him motivated (or maybe not).
Can't hurt anything.

Not excited about Harriston, but with Gonzo hurt, it's smart to get some infield depth. If you don't sign someone like Harriston, then if Keppinger gets hurt, who do we have that can even play? No one.
I don't know Castro's status, but he's so washed up.
I don't want to bring up some 19 year old minor leaguer to start at SS that will be overwhelmed.

IMO, this was a smart move by Wayne to get some depth for no cost. It won't get him GM of the year, but it's a nice move.

BRM

03-04-2008, 10:35 AM

Per Fay:

Dusty on Patterson, Bruce

Dusty Baker's on the Corey Patterson signing (Patterson and Jerry Hairston were not here this morning):

“Like I told you all the other day, No. 2, we’re short on bodies. No. 2, competition is healthy. We’re trying to improve ourself for now and future possibly. We’re trying to win this thing and go north with best people possible.”

“The main thing is he's still young. What's Corey? 28 years old? To me, he hasn't scratched the surface as to what he can do. He's one of the fastest runners in the league. He plays a great center field. He was caught in between not knowing what kind of hitter he was going to be -- if he was get-on-base speed man or he had enough power. It kind of messes you up. As a young hitter, I went through that. You don't if you’re a hitter or a slugger. I think he's decided through hook or crook that he's more of a hitter. When we had with the Cubs, he hadn't even bunted in minor leagues. He was told he was 30-30 man. Sonny Jackson taught him how to bunt. Now, he's one of the best bunters around. His upside potential is great, and he’s been a around a while.”

Baker was asked if Patterson had been rushed by the Cubs: “I said that once when I was there. I got in trouble from the organization because they said they didn't rush him. He's kind of epitome of hype – not to come down on you guys – but the media (builds a player up). Then every body's clamoring: Where's so and so? He's kind of where Jay Bruce used to be. In Chicago, everybody said ‘we want Corey, we want Corey.’ He came up and did real good. Then he kind of failed. The next thing they wanted to run him out of town and get someone else in there. He’s been though quite a bit of stuff.”

Does this mean Jay Bruce isn't going to make the club: "No, didn’t say that. I don’t leave open ended sentences. I say what’s on my mind. No, no, not at all. Bruce is a tremendous talent. This guy's going to be a star for a long time – long time. You don’t know if the time is right now or not. But if I didn't think he had a chance to make this club I sure wouldn't be playing him as much as I have. He's got more at-bats than anyone on the team.”

“I leave my mind open for anything. We've got to figure what’s best for the club and what's best for him, too. I was there with Matt Williams in San Francisco. I was there myself. I'm not talking about some book. It has nothing to do with age. Some of it has to do with experience and at-bats. (Bruce) has come on a course real quick. How many kids go Single-A, Double-A, Triple-A in year?”

TRF

03-04-2008, 10:40 AM

Setting aside the PECOTA of Jay Brice...

Corey Patterson: .268/.307.402
Chris Dickerson: .240/.319/.408

Looks to me like we already had one.

I immediately thought of Monty Python when I read this. His mother was a hamster too.

It might great for predicting stats for fun, but I wouldn't base roster decisions solely on it.

As a tiebreaker, I'll take the guy with the track record in the majors over the guy with no track record any day.

And if said track record is a black hole of suck?

God, I loathe the Joe Randa signing. wait...

M2

03-04-2008, 10:41 AM

Sorry, M2, as much as it kills me, I think if Patterson is in the line-up starting, he will be leading off. Hope I'm wrong.

With Dusty, odds are the CF hits leadoff. He is remarkably consistent with that one. I'm just hoping he's got a Corey Patterson amendment to that rule.

Ltlabner

03-04-2008, 10:41 AM

After thinking about it I guess I don't mind having Patterson around IF he's the replacement for a Hopper/Freel CF starting job. As a back-up and platoon guy he's not the greatest guy on the planet (in fact, kinda of a miserable one) but at least he has a legit glove and would be an overall step up from Hopper/Freel if used correctly. Not much of a step up, but one none the less.

He's not my favorite solution but I can live with it. I just hope that Patterson doesn't get 300 black-hole AB's at the top of the order, while Bruce is in AAA killing the ball for 300ABs. Then again, Bruce is a fragile, injury prone china doll now, so maybe having Patterson is the right thing afterall.

Plus he's fast and plays CF. Leadoff batter problem solved!

Chip R

03-04-2008, 10:42 AM

“Like I told you all the other day, No. 2, we’re short on bodies. No. 2, competition is healthy.

I do hope that wasn't a direct quote and Fay got things mixed up again.

This wouldn't be a bad move with Patterson in CF batting 8th but Dusty has pre-printed lineup cards that has CF at the leadoff position.

WebScorpion

03-04-2008, 10:43 AM

Thanks guys! I knew these insignificant minor league deals would send 'Zoners into a tizzy of conjecture and fits of doomsaying. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/ad/thatsit.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

They seem like no-brainers to me. A couple guys who have a small chance of finally putting it together signed to low risk minor league deals. They get one last shot to prove themselves, and Dusty gets a way to not overwork some of the guys he's been worrying about. It's all good! http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/ad/cool.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

REDREAD

03-04-2008, 10:44 AM

This team needs to devote some attention to run prevention, and OF defense is currently a major weakness. Having Griffey and Dunn on the corners makes the OF defense almost laughable. Ultimately, the plan should be to have Bruce on a corner and a real flychaser in CF. .

Great point.
If nothing else, Patterson is valuable to have on the bench for late innings with a lead. But Patterson in center and then move Hopper/Freel/Bruce to one of the corners.

We've got a bullpen that gives up a lot of baserunners. Tightening up the OF defense in late innings will help.

Actually, I have no problem at all with Patterson being the starter.
Yes, his OBP stinks, but there's more to this game than OBP.
He does do some things well. I have no problem with starting Bruce in AAA and making him break down the door to get up here.

princeton

03-04-2008, 10:47 AM

Yes, his OBP stinks, but there's more to this game than OBP.

his bunts, alone, will initiate at least 15 threads this season.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 10:48 AM

Well, it's the most accurate prediction system out there. Find me a better one and I'll happily use it.

The point stands in any case. Patterson is not significantly different than the bevy of options we already have.

Ignored in all this preliminary discussion is the scouting take delivered by Krivsky. (Why am I not surprised that this has been ignored?)

Per Krivsky (who actually named the scout involved -- a nice touch), Patterson's approach was much improved in the second half. If you look at the 200 ABs he had after the All Star break compard to the 250+ he had prior, you'll see a major jump in OPS, from .613 to .791. He didn't walk as much, but he was striking out about 25&#37; less. Maybe, as Baker says, he's figuring out what kind of hitter he truly is. Excellent defense in CF plus an OPS in the vicinity of .800 works for me.

cumberlandreds

03-04-2008, 10:59 AM

I liked what Baker had to say about Patterson. If he is "getting it" then this could be a very good find. If not, then the Reds really aren't out very much and they have some good AAA fodder.

princeton

03-04-2008, 11:01 AM

Ignored in all this preliminary discussion is the scouting take delivered by Krivsky. (Why am I not surprised that this has been ignored?)

Per Krivsky (who actually named the scout involved -- a nice touch), Patterson's approach was much improved in the second half. If you look at the 200 ABs he had after the All Star break compard to the 250+ he had prior, you'll see a major jump in OPS, from .613 to .791. He didn't walk as much, but he was striking out about 25&#37; less. Maybe, as Baker says, he's figuring out what kind of hitter he truly is. Excellent defense in CF plus an OPS in the vicinity of .800 works for me.

a Drew Stubbsian change

choked up?

Puffy

03-04-2008, 11:03 AM

I figure Patterson's the favorite for CF on opening day. Honestly, I don't think too many would complain if Dusty put together a lineup that looked something like this (btw, this isn't exactly how I'd order them, but I think there's an off chance Dusty might try it):

Granted, it would get a little ugly with Gonzalez back in the fold, but it's not a horrible starting point. At some juncture I figure Jr. gets injured and Bruce steps in too. Patterson really could be a sleeper for the Reds. He's certainly got to be motivated at the moment given that he's only gotten a minor league contract. He could have himself a career year (something like a .333 OB and .500 SLG with 40 SB and top notch defense). I'm not saying it's likely, but, given the team's defensive needs I think it's worth shaking the bottle to see if there's any lightning in there.

Exactly - if you can hide Patterson at the bottom of the lineu[ and let him use that speed and power the GAB will give him, with his defense....Its not the worst thing.

Its the other "depth" I hate (I'm looking at you Juan Castro!!)

princeton

03-04-2008, 11:05 AM

double post

princeton

03-04-2008, 11:06 AM

you can hide Patterson at the bottom of the lineu[ and let him use that speed

hit him ninth?

I've long argued that Dickerson bat there.

personally, I think that we could justify three guys (C, SS, CF) batting behind certain pitchers

Benihana

03-04-2008, 11:10 AM

you guys got what you wanted. :bang:

Wayne Krivsky should be fired immediately.

WTF??? It's an effing minor league contract!!!

Give me a break with the alarmists around here. This move is ZERO risk, very good reward potential. It's unbelievable how some people react to these incredibly MINOR signings.

Again, I like the move. Maybe I should be fired from the ORG? :p:

BRM

03-04-2008, 11:12 AM

WTF??? It's an effing minor league contract!!!

Give me a break with the alarmists around here. This move is ZERO risk, very good reward potential. It's unbelievable how some people react to these incredibly MINOR signings.

Again, I like the move. Maybe I should be fired from the ORG? :p:

Obviously, the angst is over the thought of Patterson leading off on Opening Day.

edabbs44

03-04-2008, 11:18 AM

That's my point as well.

I think Wayne should be praised for this move.

Patterson is quality depth at AAA. There's more to baseball than OBP. He's a nice bench player on a cheap contract. If Bruce can't beat Patterson out for the job, then Bruce doesn't deserve to play. Likewise, I don't have a problem at all with Patterson starting over Freel or Hopper. At least Patterson is a legitimate CF glove. He's only 28. Maybe this minor league contract will be the wake up call to get him motivated (or maybe not).
Can't hurt anything.

Not excited about Harriston, but with Gonzo hurt, it's smart to get some infield depth. If you don't sign someone like Harriston, then if Keppinger gets hurt, who do we have that can even play? No one.
I don't know Castro's status, but he's so washed up.
I don't want to bring up some 19 year old minor leaguer to start at SS that will be overwhelmed.

IMO, this was a smart move by Wayne to get some depth for no cost. It won't get him GM of the year, but it's a nice move.

In a vacuum, is this a nice move? Sure.

Should he be "praised" for it? No.

I'll reserve my praise for WK when he puts a winning team on the field. Everyone loves to take a ride on the Wayne Train based on a transaction by transaction move and use those moves as evidence of Wayne doing a good job.

72-90 last year. This year, not looking much better.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 11:20 AM

Obviously, the angst is over the thought of Patterson leading off on Opening Day.

However, as I contemplate a lineup that includes Patterson AND Gonzo AND Ross...well, there is only one number 8 spot.

TRF

03-04-2008, 11:25 AM

WTF??? It's an effing minor league contract!!!

Give me a break with the alarmists around here. This move is ZERO risk, very good reward potential. It's unbelievable how some people react to these incredibly MINOR signings.

Again, I like the move. Maybe I should be fired from the ORG? :p:

Zero risk? Hardly. The risk is he (Patterson) is installed as the opening day CF despite a long track record of being unable to find 1B with a map. The risk is he does so while Bruce knocks the crap out of the ball all through ST AND then at Louisville, therefore wasting actual production. The risk is Patterson steals 5-6 bases in April WHILE making outs 70% of the time and Baker labeling his signing a success.

There is nothing Corey Patterson offers that cannot be duplicated by Dickerson except MLB experience. And to that I say Juan Castro has MLB experience, and the only time I want him on the field is as a coach.

dabvu2498

03-04-2008, 11:25 AM

Some good news:

Patterson only hit into 3 DPs last year in 461 ABs. Had 0 in 2006 in 463 ABs. :)

westofyou

03-04-2008, 11:29 AM

WTF??? It's an effing minor league contract!!!

Give me a break with the alarmists around here. This move is ZERO risk, very good reward potential. It's unbelievable how some people react to these incredibly MINOR signings.

Again, I like the move. Maybe I should be fired from the ORG? :p:

It's akin to folks complaining about having to bend down to pick up a ten dollar bill on the ground that blows across their path when walking down the street.

"Well I can't buy the world with it... why bother?"

"It's only paper... gold is the real standard"

"I'll just stand here and wait for a C Note to come by before I do anything"

traderumor

03-04-2008, 11:35 AM

Zero risk? Hardly. The risk is he (Patterson) is installed as the opening day CF despite a long track record of being unable to find 1B with a map. The risk is he does so while Bruce knocks the crap out of the ball all through ST AND then at Louisville, therefore wasting actual production. The risk is Patterson steals 5-6 bases in April WHILE making outs 70% of the time and Baker labeling his signing a success.

There is nothing Corey Patterson offers that cannot be duplicated by Dickerson except MLB experience. And to that I say Juan Castro has MLB experience, and the only time I want him on the field is as a coach.But one must consider the weight of the "except." You are predicting that Dickerson is a Patterson clone, but he could easily be a worse major league bat than Patterson because he has struggled in the minors with his bat, whereas Patterson had some minor league and spotty major league success. I don't understand the infatuation with a prospect in such scenarios with the flameout rates of so-called comparable performance expectations.

However, as I contemplate a lineup that includes Patterson AND Gonzo AND Ross...well, there is only one number 8 spot.

Good point.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 11:37 AM

I'd say there is very little chance of Baker running out that lineup.

Agreed.

Chip R

03-04-2008, 11:43 AM

Again, I like the move. Maybe I should be fired from the ORG? :p:

Boss is putting on his Donald Trump wig as we speak. ;)

edabbs44

03-04-2008, 11:47 AM

But one must consider the weight of the "except." You are predicting that Dickerson is a Patterson clone, but he could easily be a worse major league bat than Patterson because he has struggled in the minors with his bat, whereas Patterson had some minor league and spotty major league success. I don't understand the infatuation with a prospect in such scenarios with the flameout rates of so-called comparable performance expectations.

Exactly.

TRF

03-04-2008, 11:54 AM

But one must consider the weight of the "except." You are predicting that Dickerson is a Patterson clone, but he could easily be a worse major league bat than Patterson because he has struggled in the minors with his bat, whereas Patterson had some minor league and spotty major league success. I don't understand the infatuation with a prospect in such scenarios with the flameout rates of so-called comparable performance expectations.

My problem isn't so much that Patterson is blocking a juggernaut like Dickerson (please note the sarcasm) it's more that he blocks Bruce. But if you are going to block Bruce why do it with such a known entity with so little upside? His career OBP is below .300. By all accounts, he can go get it in the OF, but by all accounts, so can Dickerson. So, what does he bring to the Reds? depth? sorry I don't see it.

And what success did patterson ever have? 83 games in 2003. that's it.

Benihana

03-04-2008, 12:14 PM

My problem isn't so much that Patterson is blocking a juggernaut like Dickerson (please note the sarcasm) it's more that he blocks Bruce. But if you are going to block Bruce why do it with such a known entity with so little upside? His career OBP is below .300. By all accounts, he can go get it in the OF, but by all accounts, so can Dickerson. So, what does he bring to the Reds? depth? sorry I don't see it.

And what success did patterson ever have? 83 games in 2003. that's it.

The second half of 2007. Most of 2006. I guess we'll just have to see.

Again, not saying he's the second coming. But he does have the upside to be a big upgrade over Hoppreelkerson. As far as comparing him to Dickerson specifically, I'd take the guy who can hit .270 in the majors over the guy who can't in AA. And as so many have pointed out, Jr.'s blocking Bruce, not whoever's playing CF.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 12:18 PM

Patterson may block Bruce in 2008(so may Hopper or Freel). After Jr is gone he will likely move to RF in 2009 but it certainly seems that Bruce is the best option in CF in 2008. I really have no idea what Dusty/WK might do with the roster at this point. Guys like Hopper, Patterson and Freel at replacement level or slightly above.

BRM

03-04-2008, 12:24 PM

What does PECOTA forecast for Patterson this year?

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 12:25 PM

Guys like Hopper, Patterson and Freel at replacement level or slightly above.

Supposedly, Patterson is a significantly better defender in CF than either Hopper or Freel. Defense in CF matters.

princeton

03-04-2008, 12:29 PM

Patterson may block Bruce in 2008.

Jr's blocking Bruce

TRF

03-04-2008, 12:30 PM

The second half of 2007. Most of 2006. I guess we'll just have to see.

Again, not saying he's the second coming. But he does have the upside to be a big upgrade over Hoppreelkerson. As far as comparing him to Dickerson specifically, I'd take the guy who can hit .270 in the majors over the guy who can't in AA. And as so many have pointed out, Jr.'s blocking Bruce, not whoever's playing CF.

2006 was a success? color me stunned that anyone would think that a .757 OPS is a success. He did steal a bunch of bases whenever ho got on base, which wasn't that often. In fact, compare his 2006 to Felipe Lopez' 2006. similar SB totals, similar CS, similar OPS. break it down though and who is more valuable? a guy that can get on base, or one that can't?

How about 2005 when he hit .215. Dude that's only .215 more than I hit, and I didn't even step foot on a mlb field.

He's the definition of empty fill in the BA. He's OB challenged and is a power hitter that doesn't hit for power. You could say that he'll get a bump in O from the GABP, but he played in Wrigley and couldn't hit there. So, he's being brought in for defense. I'm fine with a defensive upgrade in CF, but Dickerson already is that. So is Bruce frankly.

Not a bad guy to have in your organization, but like Hopper, Freel, or Dickerson, not a guy worthy of blocking Jay Bruce. A platoon of him and one of the righties isn't a bad way to start the year, with Bruce coming up as soon as Junior hits the DL.

Barring a miracle on the pitching staff, I seriously doubt we'll be in contention this year, Bruce or not. Another 100-200 PA in AAA won't hurt Bruce any and it will put off the start of his arb clock.

Highlifeman21

03-04-2008, 12:41 PM

Well, I think I'd prefer Patterson in CF over Farney or Hopper. At least he can play credible defense.

Patterson is a defensive upgrade over both Freel and Hopper. Unfortunately, he's an offensive downgrade from Freel, and I have a feeling once we see teams adjust to Norris "1 trick pony" Hopper and take away his bunting and his speed, that Patterson and Hopper will be equal offensively.

Combine the CF conundrum with the SS conundrum, and we could possibly be looking at another stick vs. D battle. Janish (no stick all D) vs. Keppinger (no D all stick) vs. Rosales (worst D of the 3, ? on the stick). If the Reds choose to address the defensive woes, we could be looking at Janish @ SS and Patterson in CF. That means we're going to be looking for an unreasonable and impossible position of expected offensive production out of the other 6.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 12:42 PM

Supposedly, Patterson is a significantly better defender in CF than either Hopper or Freel. Defense in CF matters.

PECOTA thinks that Patterson is slightly better defender and a slightly better offensive player than either.

Defense is important but who to play at any position is always a series of trade-offs.

Benihana

03-04-2008, 12:44 PM

2006 was a success? color me stunned that anyone would think that a .757 OPS is a success. He did steal a bunch of bases whenever ho got on base, which wasn't that often. In fact, compare his 2006 to Felipe Lopez' 2006. similar SB totals, similar CS, similar OPS. break it down though and who is more valuable? a guy that can get on base, or one that can't?

How about 2005 when he hit .215. Dude that's only .215 more than I hit, and I didn't even step foot on a mlb field.

He's the definition of empty fill in the BA. He's OB challenged and is a power hitter that doesn't hit for power. You could say that he'll get a bump in O from the GABP, but he played in Wrigley and couldn't hit there. So, he's being brought in for defense. I'm fine with a defensive upgrade in CF, but Dickerson already is that. So is Bruce frankly.

I highly doubt Dickerson could put up a .780 OPS and steal 40 bases in the big leagues this year, which is what CP has done for the past two seasons in a much worse hitters park than GAB. And like I said before, I would look for him to improve on those numbers. We'll just have to see.

Patterson's defense is an enormous upgrade to Freel or Hopper, which as lollipopcurve just said, is important in CF.

Bruce, for better or worse, is a Right Fielder in this organization. Just like Phillips at 2B, people are just going to have to accept that.

BRM

03-04-2008, 12:44 PM

Assuming Bruce starts the year in Louisville, I have no issue with Patterson in CF and batting 7th or 8th. Platoon him with either Freel or Hopper.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 12:45 PM

Jr's blocking Bruceyes and if Bruce is not playing in CF then whoever is playing that position is blocking him as well(no one has stated that he can't handle CF defensively). PECOTA thinks Bruce would be an upgrade over Jr in RF and Hopper/Freel/Patterson in CF.

When you look at the Reds best choices for an OF taking offense and defense into account the optimal alignment is rather simple, Dunn in LF, Bruce in CF and Jr in RF.

IslandRed

03-04-2008, 12:47 PM

I don't think the decision about Jay Bruce will have anything to do with Corey Patterson's presence or lack thereof. It's a simple question -- are they comfortable with Bruce as an everyday center fielder or not? This is primarily a defensive question, we know he'll hit. If the answer is yes, then no one on this team is good enough to block him. If the answer is no, then it'll get interesting, I guess.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 12:48 PM

BTW, the Reds were 9th in the NL in equivalent average last year. Offense was an issue just not as big as pitching and defense. The numbers(FRAA) from 2007 say that Gonzo and Keppinger were pretty much the defender in their games at SS. Deciding who to play is always a series of tradeoffs.

PuffyPig

03-04-2008, 12:48 PM

2006 was a success? color me stunned that anyone would think that a .757 OPS is a success. He did steal a bunch of bases whenever ho got on base, which wasn't that often. In fact, compare his 2006 to Felipe Lopez' 2006. similar SB totals, similar CS, similar OPS. break it down though and who is more valuable? a guy that can get on base, or one that can't?

In comparing him to Lopez you left out the most important difference. Patterson is a plus defender (at a skill postion), Lopez is a minus defender.

Similiar OPS with much better defence puts Patterson above Lopez. And many here still squeel in angony over the Lopez departure.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 12:48 PM

once we see teams adjust to Norris "1 trick pony" Hopper and take away his bunting and his speed, that Patterson and Hopper will be equal offensively.

How do you take away someone's speed?

They can defense his bunts to a certain extent, but not completely, and they were trying last year. If the 2nd baseman pulls in too far (allowing the first baseman to stay at first), Hopper can see that and can then hit away to the right side, where he'll have a better chance of getting one by the pulled-in 2nd baseman. Having the pitcher cover first, assuming it's a lefty -- which is usually when Hopper uses the push bunt -- is always going to be tough, because Hopper can beat him to the bag almost every time.

Highlifeman21

03-04-2008, 12:50 PM

a Drew Stubbsian change

choked up?

His toe healed.

M2

03-04-2008, 12:52 PM

My problem isn't so much that Patterson is blocking a juggernaut like Dickerson (please note the sarcasm) it's more that he blocks Bruce. But if you are going to block Bruce why do it with such a known entity with so little upside? His career OBP is below .300. By all accounts, he can go get it in the OF, but by all accounts, so can Dickerson. So, what does he bring to the Reds? depth? sorry I don't see it.

And what success did patterson ever have? 83 games in 2003. that's it.

My take is that Jr.'s the one blocking Bruce (and that Hamilton was moved partially because he was blocking Bruce as well). Matter of perspective I guess, but Bruce is going to be a RF. Maybe he could be called up to play CF given the current OF situation. Yet in the grand scheme of things I can live with Jr. getting Pipped sometime this season.

Patterson's a true CF, not a defensive compromise. In fact Patterson can be stellar with the glove. Since I've long been a proponent of the Reds getting serious about defense, it would be more than a bit hypocritcal of me to get up in arms because that defense doesn't come in the exact offensive package I might prefer.

IMO, one of the problems that plagued the Reds this decade is the team hasn't done some of the fundamental things that a baseball team needs to do. This has got nothing to do with the thoughtless calls for fundamentals that we've been treated to - more bunting, acting like BA is the goal of hitting, freaking out over strikeouts. What the Reds have been missing is fundamental stuff like defense up the middle, players with skills that complement each other, the ability to win a game with something other than the longball.

Some of the transition from where the club has been to where it needs to go will be awkward, but a plus glove in CF is an absolute need. Maybe the Reds will be morphing into more of a bat-on-ball offense as a result of that and maybe they'll need to find better bat-on-ball players down the road, but it's been nine years since the club had a defender like Patterson patrolling CF (I suppose you could try to make a case for Jr. in 2000, but I won't, he was a defensive downgrade from Mike Cameron).

The Reds are changing, maybe not as dramatically as we'd like, but the 2005 Reds have just about been purged. Will some new mistakes be made in the place of old ones not repeated? Of course, but I think we also have to allow that some of what this team is doing might work better/fit together better than we suspect at first blush. Add in Patterson and Votto to start the season and Bruce somewhere along the way, mix in a step forward for Edwin Encarnacion (hopefully) and I'm not quite sure what happens. I still think the catcher who gets most of the PT for the Reds this season has yet to be acquired too.

I'm not saying those seeing disaster in the tea leaves are wrong, just that I think this club is going to be different enough from previous models that some of our assumptions might be challenged. Also, even if this is a New Kind of Wrong, I suspect we'll find there's a little bit of right mixed in.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 12:52 PM

How do you take away someone's speed?

They can defense his bunts to a certain extent, but not completely, and they were trying last year. If the 2nd baseman pulls in too far (allowing the first baseman to stay at first), Hopper can see that and can then hit away to the right side, where he'll have a better chance of getting one by the pulled-in 2nd baseman. Having the pitcher cover first, assuming it's a lefty -- which is usually when Hopper uses the push bunt, is always going to be tough, because Hopper can beat him to the bag almost every time.Patterson is certainly as fast or faster than Hopper. Hopper's bunting is much more effective against LHPs(they fall off toward 3rd), he had a much harder time pushing bunts past RHPs.

If Freel's lack of patience is the real Freel moving forward then Freel and Hopper are essentially the same player from an offensive standpoint.

Highlifeman21

03-04-2008, 12:57 PM

How do you take away someone's speed?

They can defense his bunts to a certain extent, but not completely, and they were trying last year. If the 2nd baseman pulls in too far (allowing the first baseman to stay at first), Hopper can see that and can then hit away to the right side, where he'll have a better chance of getting one by the pulled-in 2nd baseman. Having the pitcher cover first, assuming it's a lefty -- which is usually when Hopper uses the push bunt -- is always going to be tough, because Hopper can beat him to the bag almost every time.

I didn't see hardly any team adjust to Norris Hopper's bunting threat last year. Almost as if they didn't respect that he could do so.

There's enough tape on Norris Hopper for teams to adjust to his bunting, and align the infielders accordingly to properly defense his propensity to hit groundballs. If Hopper's on base, you'll see more throw overs to 1B. You'll see catchers make snap throws to 1B. You'll see pitchouts. You'll see his speed negated, b/c other teams have to already realize it's the only thing he's got goin' for him.

If he were able to consistently hit the ball into the gaps in the air, Norris Hopper would be a guy I'd almost consider starting everyday. But he can't, so I don't.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 12:59 PM

BTW, I see Patterson as a guy who might stick around for more than a year. Even with Bruce the Reds are going to need 2 more OFs in 2009 as it is likely that neither Dunn or Jr will be a Red.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 01:03 PM

I highly doubt Dickerson could put up a .780 OPS and steal 40 bases in the big leagues this year, which is what CP has done for the past two seasons in a much worse hitters park than GAB.

Stolen bases are the cherry on the sundae, and pale in comparison to the run value impact of getting on base in the first place. A .350 OBP is more valuable than a .300 OBP and 80/100 SB.

It's important to remember that for every CS you have, you basically negate the value of 3 SB. So 80/100 SB is really only a net of 20 SB worth of value. Make that 75/100 and you've basically added no value. You figure, every 10 points of OBP is equivilent to 6 more times on base, and 6 fewer outs. A successful SB still doesn't save you an out -- but a CS does cost you an extra one. You could almost say that stealing bases is like trading on base percentage for a weaker version of slugging percentage. When you already struggle to get on base, risking more outs hardly seems like a great way to maximize your value -- especially when you run the bases well outside of that.

Of course, Patterson is a good base runner in general and analysis shows him adding 5 runs or more per year on the bases. That's nothing to sneeze at, but a pretty small piece of the offensive pie. It's important to keep it in perspective.

PuffyPig

03-04-2008, 01:05 PM

BTW, the Reds were 9th in the NL in equivalent average last year. Offense was an issue just not as big as pitching and defense.

I judge a teams offense based on runs scored.

While the Reds placed 7th, they were only 27 runs out of 3rd spot, and 29 ahead of the 8th place team. In other words, they were closer to 3rd than 8th.

Pitching and defense are still their biggest concerns.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 01:09 PM

I judge a teams offense based on runs scored.

While the Reds placed 7th, they were only 27 runs out of 3rd spot, and 29 ahead of the 8th place team. In other words, they were closer to 3rd than 8th.

Pitching and defense are still their biggest concerns.

I don't think anybody is arguing that pitching and defense aren't concerns 1 & 2 (or rather 1 & 1a). But pretending like the offense is a plus is setting us up for failure; it is merely acceptable. While priorities are important, we need to improve across the board. Trading one problem for another would not help us make progress.

M2

03-04-2008, 01:09 PM

I judge a teams offense based on runs scored.

While the Reds placed 7th, they were only 27 runs out of 3rd spot, and 29 ahead of the 8th place team. In other words, they were closer to 3rd than 8th.

Pitching and defense are still their biggest concerns.

But you've got to factor ballpark into that. 775 runs in San Diego aren't the same as 775 runs in the GAB.

flyer85

03-04-2008, 01:18 PM

Reds scored a lot of runs because they play in a nice hitters park ... it makes the offense look better and the pitching look worse. It's why run differential is what is really important.

REDREAD

03-04-2008, 01:35 PM

In a vacuum, is this a nice move? Sure.

Should he be "praised" for it? No.

I'll reserve my praise for WK when he puts a winning team on the field. Everyone loves to take a ride on the Wayne Train based on a transaction by transaction move and use those moves as evidence of Wayne doing a good job.

72-90 last year. This year, not looking much better.

Now I agree with this take.
Overall, Wayne failed this winter. He had at least two opportunities to trade for a stud starter and failed.. He may have had more than two opportunities according to the rumors.

This year is another year of treading water and waiting for the kid calvary to arrive in a couple more years.. We've been playing that game too long, I agree.

Maybe "praised" is too strong of a word, but I like the fact that Wayne recognized he needed another OF and another backup infielder and actually did something about it. Now if we can only get him to address some of the other weaknesses.

Patterson is all upside for no cost, IMO. It's not really Patterson's fault or Wayne's fault if Dusty does bat Patterson leadoff.
Bad OBP aside, Patterson is the legit CF this team sorely needed.
Maybe Lofton or someone else out there was a better option, but this isn't a bad deal at all. My guess is that Wayne is out of money, and Lofton isn't going to take a minor league deal.

Of course, it's Wayne's fault that he has money tied up in Freel, Castro, Stanton, etc.

TRF

03-04-2008, 01:35 PM

I highly doubt Dickerson could put up a .780 OPS and steal 40 bases in the big leagues this year, which is what CP has done for the past two seasons in a much worse hitters park than GAB. And like I said before, I would look for him to improve on those numbers. We'll just have to see.

Patterson's defense is an enormous upgrade to Freel or Hopper, which as lollipopcurve just said, is important in CF.

Bruce, for better or worse, is a Right Fielder in this organization. Just like Phillips at 2B, people are just going to have to accept that.

.780? really? no. .690 last year and .757 the year before. Make your case, thats fine, but that's an exaggeration bordering on lying. The SB's are on the mark though, but how much does his PUTRID OBP offset any good that comes from them. He's an out machine, a poor fit at any spot in the lineup, and his best skill is defense that may not offset his HORRIBLE skills at the plate. And yes, he is blocking Jay Bruce no matter what others say about Jr. doing it. RF may be Bruce's true position, but AAA should be Patterson's.

REDREAD

03-04-2008, 01:42 PM

My problem isn't so much that Patterson is blocking a juggernaut like Dickerson (please note the sarcasm) it's more that he blocks Bruce. But if you are going to block Bruce why do it with such a known entity with so little upside? His career OBP is below .300. By all accounts, he can go get it in the OF, but by all accounts, so can Dickerson. So, what does he bring to the Reds? depth? sorry I don't see it.

And what success did patterson ever have? 83 games in 2003. that's it.

As someone else said, Patterson finished last season strong.
Patterson isn't blocking Bruce at all. If Wayne wants Bruce in AAA, then Bruce is going there, regardless of whether we had Patterson or not.

I'm not Wayne's biggest fan, but he is aggressive in his promotions of prospects. I don't think we have to worry about Wayne keeping Bruce in AAA just because Patterson is playing well. Every major league team has no problem getting plenty of playing time for 4 OF, especially if one of those OF is like Jr and needs rest.

Basically, I believe Bruce will be on the major league team as soon as Wayne feels he is ready, regardless of the composition of the roster.

TRF

03-04-2008, 01:48 PM

In comparing him to Lopez you left out the most important difference. Patterson is a plus defender (at a skill postion), Lopez is a minus defender.

Similiar OPS with much better defence puts Patterson above Lopez. And many here still squeel in angony over the Lopez departure.

Similar OPS doesn't tell the whole story either. Patterson's was SLG driven, but not enough for him to be any kind of difference maker. Lopez was OBP driven and added to his SB's made him dangerous, and a valuable commodity at the top of the order. Given that Dusty has already shown an affinity towards batting his CF and Patterson in particular at that position, I see a recipe for disaster.

For their career, If you had to choose between the two, who would you pick overall, and who would you pick to lead off? For me, I never pick Patterson period.

Now, I do value defense, and I think the in house options compare favorably to Patterson. Freel and Hopper are both below him. Dickerson could be his equal with the glove. I don't see the point of adding Patterson as it almost surely means Bruce is headed to AAA.

REDREAD

03-04-2008, 01:51 PM

. I don't see the point of adding Patterson as it almost surely means Bruce is headed to AAA.

Not to be repetitive, but I don't see this as a cause-and-effect thing.

Heck, Wayne probably already decided in December to start Bruce at AAA, he just didn't tell us.

After he traded Hamilton, he decide to go fishing for some cheap OF depth. Thus Patterson, the Lofton rumors, etc.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 02:10 PM

Similar OPS doesn't tell the whole story either. Patterson's was SLG driven, but not enough for him to be any kind of difference maker.

Second-half OPS of .791 (factor in his SBs and it's higher) and plus defense in CF. What would people be saying if the name were Chris Denorfia instead of Corey Patterson?

BRM

03-04-2008, 02:13 PM

Second-half OPS of .791 (factor in his SBs and it's higher) and plus defense in CF. What would people be saying if the name were Chris Denorfia instead of Corey Patterson?

The mere sight of Chris Denorfia makes people go weak in the knees. I seriously doubt Corey Patterson has that type of effect on the masses.

Benihana

03-04-2008, 02:32 PM

.780? really? no. .690 last year and .757 the year before. Make your case, thats fine, but that's an exaggeration bordering on lying. The SB's are on the mark though, but how much does his PUTRID OBP offset any good that comes from them. He's an out machine, a poor fit at any spot in the lineup, and his best skill is defense that may not offset his HORRIBLE skills at the plate. And yes, he is blocking Jay Bruce no matter what others say about Jr. doing it. RF may be Bruce's true position, but AAA should be Patterson's.

Lying? Give me an effing break. I misread last year's OPS as .790 instead of .690 because baseball reference makes you calculate manually. Taking an average of the two years would give him an OPS of ~780. I will admit there is obviously a big difference between .690 and .790, but it was a mental miscaluclation, so how about forgiving me for the overlook instead of accusing me of lying.

And in my opinion you'll be wrong about Patterson, I think it's a great no risk great reward move. You can't blame Wayne for the way Dusty constructs his lineups. Evaluating Wayne on this move, I give him an A. And only time will tell whether or not Patterson can perform. If he doesn't, boohoo we wasted a minor league contract. If he does, I can't wait to watch you eat crow.

Benihana

03-04-2008, 02:41 PM

Second-half OPS of .791 (factor in his SBs and it's higher) and plus defense in CF. What would people be saying if the name were Chris Denorfia instead of Corey Patterson?

EXACTLY. For the life of me I can't understand why people cry over trading Denorfia while lambasting signing Patterson to a minor league deal. Patterson was starting in the majors (after being a BA Top 5 prospect in all of professional baseball) when Denorfia was playing for Wheaton College, impressing his way all the way to a 19th round pick.

And that would mean nothing if Denorfia had established himself at the major league level in the six years since then, which he's clearly done with his- what, 142 major league at-bats? 2 career home runs? 2 career stolen bases? Oh, and did I mention they are basically the same age?

flyer85

03-04-2008, 02:44 PM

PECOTA thinks similarly of Denorfia and Patterson.

Will M

03-04-2008, 02:45 PM

1. The Reds have a nice group of young offensive players at
1B-2B-3B-LF-RF ( Votto-Phillips-EE-Dunn-Bruce ).

2. The Reds need better players at the 'defense first positions' of SS-C-CF

Bruce is a 'C' defender in CF & a 'B' defender in RF.
Patterson is either a 'B' or 'A' defender in CF.
Griffey is an 'F' defender anywhere.

Bruce has good speed but doesn't have the great speed to be a plus defender in CF.

3. I would love to see Bruce in RF this year. Let Jr hit #600 as a Red then move to the AL. Then let Bruce play his natural position in RF and put the plus defender in CF.

KronoRed

03-04-2008, 02:57 PM

PECOTA thinks similarly of Denorfia and Patterson.

Maybe the A's would be interested in a swap :D

TRF

03-04-2008, 04:11 PM

Second-half OPS of .791 (factor in his SBs and it's higher) and plus defense in CF. What would people be saying if the name were Chris Denorfia instead of Corey Patterson?
80 games in a 6 1/2 year career?

Lying? Give me an effing break. I misread last year's OPS as .790 instead of .690 because baseball reference makes you calculate manually. Taking an average of the two years would give him an OPS of ~780. I will admit there is obviously a big difference between .690 and .790, but it was a mental miscaluclation, so how about forgiving me for the overlook instead of accusing me of lying.

And in my opinion you'll be wrong about Patterson, I think it's a great no risk great reward move. You can't blame Wayne for the way Dusty constructs his lineups. Evaluating Wayne on this move, I give him an A. And only time will tell whether or not Patterson can perform. If he doesn't, boohoo we wasted a minor league contract. If he does, I can't wait to watch you eat crow.

ok lying was harsh and I apologize. BTW, OPS is listed under special batting on baseball-reference's site. Just scroll down a little. And no, it won't be a minor league contract when despite all the evidence that says he's a sucky hitter, Dusty has him starting in CF on opening day. Personally I see a sub .740 OPS in his future and worse, a sub .300 OBP. I don't care if he's Honus Wagner AND Willie Mays with the glove, that ain't acceptable.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 04:15 PM

80 games in a 6 1/2 year career?

The most recent half-season in his career. It doesn't mean he will always perform at that level, but it does mean it is possible he has changed his approach -- learned something -- so that he has a chance to be that good from here on out, maybe even better.

The guy is a human being. People have the capacity to adapt in order to survive, ya know?

Falls City Beer

03-04-2008, 04:19 PM

You can be sure that, even if Patterson was to OPS .830, steal 30 bags (get caught twice), OB .340, hit 13 homers--plays very good defense, someone would focus on whatever metric they could find that says he still didn't have a good season. And that paying a guy MLB minimum for that kind of production was a mistake.

TRF

03-04-2008, 04:21 PM

yes. yes they do. Juan Castro OPS'd .747 in 2006. In july of that year he had an .828. 2006 was his last healthy year before his TJ surgery last year.

Think Juan turned a corner? Or did he just have a couple of hot months?

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 04:36 PM

yes. yes they do. Juan Castro OPS'd .747 in 2006. In july of that year he had an .828. 2006 was his last healthy year before his TJ surgery last year.

Think Juan turned a corner? Or did he just have a couple of hot months?

Time will tell. Patterson is younger than the Castro you mention -- a point in his favor. It's certainly worth the minimal investment they've made to find out, in my opinion.

Benihana

03-04-2008, 04:41 PM

80 games in a 6 1/2 year career?

That's more major league games than Denorfia even got into over the same period. And people sat shiva over his departure.

reds44

03-04-2008, 04:42 PM

Patterson's offensive numbers will go up playing in GABP, there is very little doube about that. The question is, how much?

BRM

03-04-2008, 04:44 PM

Patterson's offensive numbers will go up playing in GABP, there is very little doube about that. The question is, how much?

I think we can reasonably expect a boost in his slugging. OBP? Who knows.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 04:51 PM

You can be sure that, even if Patterson was to OPS .830, steal 30 bags (get caught twice), OB .340, hit 13 homers--plays very good defense, someone would focus on whatever metric they could find that says he still didn't have a good season. And that paying a guy MLB minimum for that kind of production was a mistake.

Nothing like a good strawman. If Corey Patterson did those things, I doubt many people, if anybody, would be (seriously) complaining about him.

I guess you could also point out that a guy could OBP .400 and hit 40 homers and the scouting types would still complain about the strikeouts....

In the end, the only remaining point is that no player, no trade, no front office decision will ever be without a critic. It's a reality we just have to accept.

TRF

03-04-2008, 04:57 PM

Patterson's offensive numbers will go up playing in GABP, there is very little doube about that. The question is, how much?

Why. were they great in Wrigley?

BRM

03-04-2008, 04:57 PM

In the end, the only remaining point is that no player, no trade, no front office decision will ever be without a critic. It's a reality we just have to accept.

I don't know. I can't imagine hearing any criticism if the Reds were to release Juan Castro.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 05:00 PM

I don't know. I can't imagine hearing any criticism if the Reds were to release Juan Castro.

WWMS?

BRM

03-04-2008, 05:00 PM

Corey speaks. This from C. Trent's blog.

I'm happy to be here and glad the Reds want me to come into camp and I'm going to work hard and do what I can to make this team.

The way I look at things, I'm not really here worrying about what this player does or that player does. I believe in baseball you compete against yourself. If you worry about what this player does or that player is doing, you’re going to loose focus on what you have to do. It's hard enough at times that you don't need to put extra things in the equation. I think just for a player, it’s coming to the park every day, working hard, being consistent in your approach and work habits.

I'll pull for everyone, for all my teammates and go from there. I think I'm one of those players in my career I've shown that can play good defense, steal some bases, a line-drive, gap hitter. I know I have potential and I have done things well in the game -- the baserunning, the hitting, throwing, defense, but at the same time, I'm always looking to improve. I'm never satisfyied. You talk to every major league player, no matter how well you did, you always want to get better.

I look at it, like I said earlier, you just keep working hard and good things will happen. They may not happen when you want them to happen.

I think really staying more consistent with my approach. That's something players battle every year. I got to a point where I said no matter what kind of result I get, I'd do the same thing every day. That's when you start changing and things get more complicated and you get loss. You have to not worry about the result and stick to your gameplan.

BRM

03-04-2008, 05:01 PM

WWMS?

Is that a radio station?

westofyou

03-04-2008, 05:05 PM

Harry Craft would like Corey's game.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 05:07 PM

the scouting types would still complain about the strikeouts....

The scouting types? Come on. You sound like a modern-day Marge.

I think it's more the "if you strike out you stink" average Joe, abetted by a stir-the-pot gimme-emotion media.

traderumor

03-04-2008, 05:31 PM

You can be sure that, even if Patterson was to OPS .830, steal 30 bags (get caught twice), OB .340, hit 13 homers--plays very good defense, someone would focus on whatever metric they could find that says he still didn't have a good season. And that paying a guy MLB minimum for that kind of production was a mistake.FCB? Is that you?:confused:;)

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 06:20 PM

The scouting types? Come on. You sound like a modern-day Marge.

I think it's more the "if you strike out you stink" average Joe, abetted by a stir-the-pot gimme-emotion media.

I assume then I'll never hear a stat-heads generalization from you...

Falls City Beer

03-04-2008, 07:04 PM

Nothing like a good strawman. If Corey Patterson did those things, I doubt many people, if anybody, would be (seriously) complaining about him.

I guess you could also point out that a guy could OBP .400 and hit 40 homers and the scouting types would still complain about the strikeouts....

In the end, the only remaining point is that no player, no trade, no front office decision will ever be without a critic. It's a reality we just have to accept.

People did it about Rich Aurilia. And more than one person.

lollipopcurve

03-04-2008, 08:09 PM

I assume then I'll never hear a stat-heads generalization from you...

I've never been an ideologue when it comes to this stuff. The game is too nuanced for that kind of simplistic thinking.

traderumor

03-04-2008, 08:41 PM

Patterson's offensive numbers will go up playing in GABP, there is very little doube about that. The question is, how much?So would anyone else they signed. This is the flip side of the suggestion that a bad pitcher in GABP would see his numbers improve in a "pitcher's park." While that is probably true, that is not an argument for signing anyone from the Reds point of view anymore than it was an argument for the Nats or Padres to take Eric Milton.

RedsManRick

03-04-2008, 08:42 PM

I've never been an ideologue when it comes to this stuff. The game is too nuanced for that kind of simplistic thinking.

Fair enough. I agree -- not trying to be inflammatory.

GAC

03-04-2008, 09:35 PM

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times. The problem with signing like these is that eventually these players always get a shot on the 25 man roster.

Sure they are going to get a shot. Why sign them if that is not a possibility? But as WK just stated....
They've got some experience, but we gave them no guarantees. They'll come in and compete."

They no compete....they no here. ;)

Highlifeman21

03-05-2008, 12:06 AM

Sure they are going to get a shot. Why sign them if that is not a possibility? But as WK just stated....

They no compete....they no here. ;)

No tickee no washee?

Jpup

03-05-2008, 03:12 AM

Should Dusty or Krivsky be making the decision on Jay Bruce? It sounds to me like Dusty is deciding who makes the roster and I'm not sure that's a good idea. I think the GM should supply the players and the manager should use what he is given. If Dusty is deciding, what's the point of the GM?

Ron Madden

03-05-2008, 04:30 AM

I'd be curious to know how many players in recent years who came to camp on a "minor league deal" who made the club and actually got significant playing time. I'm working right now, but I'll take a look at recent rosters. I think it's not many, but I could be wrong.

I agree with mth123, Patterson isn't a bad move and could help fill a need as an extra outfielder.

Okay, I took a couple of minutes and looked at the last two seasons rosters. As best I can tell, last year we had only Mark Bellhorn and Victor Santos who were signed to minor league deals and played some with the ML club. Bellhorn played in 16 games, Santos appeared in 30 games. I wanted to include Chad Moeller, but as I recall, he was signed to a ML contract. Interestingly, both Moeller and Santos had their contracts sold, as opposed to releasing them outright.

In 2006, I see only Quinton McCracken and Andy Abad having been signed to Minor League deals who ultimately played some with the team that year. I don't see Chris Michalak's transaction noted, but I think he was signed to a minor league deal too, although I don't recall him being in the ML camp.

My post was about bad Minor League deals AND bad Major League deals.

The likes of Mike Stanton and Kent Mercker are far too often signed by this organization because they are said to be "Proven Winners" with exprience and "Clubhouse Presence". A lot of good they have done for the bullpen the past few seasons.

IMHO it's silly to sign bad players from outside of the organization when we have young players inside the organization that can put up as good or better production.

I love and root for the Reds as much or more than anyone.

I'm sorry I'm not exactly like you. I don't agree or go along with every move they make.

;)

Topcat

03-05-2008, 05:36 AM

I as a optimist see this as competing for jobs, which I advocate is a excellent idea. Reactionary thoughts are built up from same old Red's thinking. times have changed and I truly want to believe best players get the job. If Bruce is not ready this is a good back up plan and our bench will be far better than years past.

mth123

03-05-2008, 07:14 AM

I don't think the decision about Jay Bruce will have anything to do with Corey Patterson's presence or lack thereof. It's a simple question -- are they comfortable with Bruce as an everyday center fielder or not? This is primarily a defensive question, we know he'll hit. If the answer is yes, then no one on this team is good enough to block him. If the answer is no, then it'll get interesting, I guess.

Agree. If the Reds were to send Bruce down, Freel/Hopper were already around to play CF and would have happened anyway.

Personally, I think the decision to bring Patterson in on a minor league contract is a no brainer. He's the best defender for the OF in a decade and and adds some skills the team is short on - real usable speed, enough power to take advantage of GABP, a LH Bat for the bench in the event that Hatte gets dealt for badly needed bullpen help and of course the defense. IMO, Patterson is a better choice for this team than Hopper or Dickerson and as an OF is a better choice than Freel (though Freel adds versatility and a RH Bat with on base skill so he and Patterson can easily co-exist on the roster and provide this team with distinctly different even if somewhat overlapping skillsets.)

If the Reds make a decision to send Bruce down, its a completely different decision than to bring Patterson in. I think in terms of what he adds, Patterson is an upgrade to other guys ticketed or competing for the roster (i.e Hopper, Dickerson and even Hatte IMO). If some one like Hopper is kept over Bruce, that will have been the bad decision not the decision to add Patterson to the mix.

wheels

03-05-2008, 09:42 AM

Agree. If the Reds were to send Bruce down, Freel/Hopper were already around to play CF and would have happened anyway.

Personally, I think the decision to bring Patterson in on a minor league contract is a no brainer. He's the best defender for the OF in a decade and and adds some skills the team is short on - real usable speed, enough power to take advantage of GABP, a LH Bat for the bench in the event that Hatte gets dealt for badly needed bullpen help and of course the defense. IMO, Patterson is a better choice for this team than Hopper or Dickerson and as an OF is a better choice than Freel (though Freel adds versatility and a RH Bat with on base skill so he and Patterson can easily co-exist on the roster and provide this team with distinctly different even if somewhat overlapping skillsets.)

If the Reds make a decision to send Bruce down, its a completely different decision than to bring Patterson in. I think in terms of what he adds, Patterson is an upgrade to other guys ticketed or competing for the roster (i.e Hopper, Dickerson and even Hatte IMO). If some one like Hopper is kept over Bruce, that will have been the bad decision not the decision to add Patterson to the mix.

By all accounts, Hopper's a cinch to make the squad.

By all accounts, Bruce is decidedly not.

That alone should tell us all we need to know.

I would go as far as to say that Patterson's probably got a better shot to go north than Bruce. It makes me cringe to even type that, but I believe that's the braintrust's general mindset.

edabbs44

03-05-2008, 09:58 AM

I as a optimist see this as competing for jobs, which I advocate is a excellent idea. Reactionary thoughts are built up from same old Red's thinking. times have changed and I truly want to believe best players get the job. If Bruce is not ready this is a good back up plan and our bench will be far better than years past.

IMO, I have no idea why everyone is totally sold on Bruce being more than ready for the bigs. Sure he did well last year, but 66 games above A ball in his career does not strike me as if they are just leaving him to die in the minors.

Let him start in Louisville and I'm sure he'll be up sooner rather than later. But we aren't looking at a guy who is 26 and ripped up AAA over a full season. He isn't even 21 yet.

RedsManRick

03-05-2008, 10:01 AM

I agree edabbs. While I think there's a good chance he could come up now and do well, it's hardly written in stone. A few months in AAA, heck, a full year in AAA, doesn't hurt anybody.

Frankly, if we're within a few games of the lead in the NL Central, whoever is playing CF will be playing well enough to justify their gig.

RANDY IN INDY

03-05-2008, 10:05 AM

I don't have a problem with Bruce starting at AAA if he doesn't just knock down the door. He is only 21, and it isn't going to hurt him or his progress. If he knocks the door down, let him play. Either way, he's going to have his time.

edabbs44

03-05-2008, 10:07 AM

I agree edabbs. While I think there's a good chance he could come up now and do well, it's hardly written in stone. A few months in AAA, heck, a full year in AAA, doesn't hurt anybody.

Frankly, if we're within a few games of the lead in the NL Central, whoever is playing CF will be playing well enough to justify their gig.

I think everyone is thirsting for something to be excited about on the big team. The case might be that the only thing that will keep the fans' attention this year is someone like Bruce.

hippie07

03-05-2008, 11:52 AM

I thought patterson could be a LH platoon w/ someone like Hopper.. but looking at last year's stats he hit .310 off LHer and .251 off righties ... I only found last years splits.. is smashing LH pitchers something he's consistently done?

membengal

03-05-2008, 12:00 PM

By all accounts, Hopper's a cinch to make the squad.

By all accounts, Bruce is decidedly not.

That alone should tell us all we need to know.

I would go as far as to say that Patterson's probably got a better shot to go north than Bruce. It makes me cringe to even type that, but I believe that's the braintrust's general mindset.

I don't think there's any question about it at this point. And, really, we all knew this, deep down, was coming.

Patterson/Hopper or Patterson/Freel. That's your platoon in CF and your leadoff bat in the Reds line-up in 2008.

Mark that.

hippie07

03-05-2008, 12:03 PM

I don't think there's any question about it at this point. And, really, we all knew this, deep down, was coming.

Patterson/Hopper or Patterson/Freel. That's your platoon in CF and your leadoff bat in the Reds line-up in 2008.

Mark that.

how do you platoon them though? Hopper hits RHers better than Patterson and Patterson hits LHers well... that will be a really screwy platoon.

membengal

03-05-2008, 12:04 PM

Doesn't matter. Dusty will play Patterson against righties and the Freel/Hopper platoon winner against lefties. Won't matter what the stats have said historically.

"Like I told you all the other day, No. 1, we're short on bodies. No. 2, competition is healthy," Baker said.

Patterson was a valuable body to get. The Reds signed the one-time uber-prospect to a minor-league deal Monday night, and he showed up in camp Tuesday.

A few years ago, it would have been unthinkable that any team could have gotten Patterson for nothing; that's how much potential he has. But he obviously hasn't lived up to his billing or he wouldn't have been available on March 3.

"The main thing is he's still young," Baker said. "What's Corey? 28 years old? To me, he hasn't scratched the surface as to what he can do. He's one of the fastest runners in the league. He plays a great center field."

Patterson says the same thing when giving a self-scouting report.

"I'm one of those players who, in my career, who's done a little bit of everything: play good defense, steal bases, a line drive-type hitter," Patterson said. I look at all phases. I know I have potential and I have done things well in the game ... But at the same time, too, I'm looking to improve. I'm never satisfied."

Patterson was the second-ranked prospect in baseball in 2001, the year after he made his major-league debut at 20, and he has shown flashes of the talent that gave him that reputation. He batted .266 with 24 home runs, 72 RBI and 32 steals in 2004, but he slipped to hitting .215 in 2005.

"He was caught in between not knowing what kind of hitter he was going to be - if he was a get-on-base, speed man or if he had enough power," Baker said. "It kind of messes you up. As a young hitter, I went through that. You don't know if you're a hitter or a slugger. I think he's decided through hook or crook that he's more of a hitter. When we had him with the Cubs, he hadn't even bunted in the minor leagues. He was told he was a 30-30 (30 home runs-30 stolen bases) man. (Cubs coach) Sonny Jackson taught him how to bunt. Now, he's one of the best bunters around. His upside is great, and he's been around a while."

Patterson is a .258 hitter with a .298 on-base percentage for his career, but the Reds liked what they saw from him late last year. He hit .313 with a .333 on-base percentage in the second half of last season with Baltimore and struck out only 21 times in 201 at-bats.

"I think really staying consistent with my approach (was the difference)," he said. "That's something that young players battle. It got to a point where I said no matter the results, I'm going to go in and do the same thing every day. If you change things every day, it becomes more complicated and then you become lost. It's about becoming consistent."

A lot of people think Patterson was rushed to majors by the Cubs, which is ironic because a lot of Reds fans are upset because Patterson's signing could keep 20-year-old Jay Bruce in the minors.

Baker is among those who think Patterson was rushed.

"I said that once when I was there," Baker said. "I got in trouble from the organization because they said they didn't rush him. He's kind of the epitome of hype - not to come down on you guys, but the media (builds him up). Then everybody's clamoring, 'Where's so-and-so?' "

Baker compared the situation to what Bruce is facing now.

"In Chicago, everybody said, 'We want Corey, we want Corey.' " Baker said. "He came up and did real good. Then he kind of failed. The next thing, they wanted to run him out of town and get someone else in there. He's been though quite a bit of stuff."

Given some of the things Baker has said over the last few days, people are assuming Bruce is out of the picture as far as starting the season with the Reds.

"No, I didn't say that," Baker said. "I don't leave open-ended sentences. I say what's on my mind. No, no, not at all. Bruce is a tremendous talent. This guy's going to be a star for a long time - long time. You don't know if the time is right now or not. But if I didn't think he had a chance to make this club, I sure would be playing him as much as I have. He's got more at-bats than anyone on the team.

"I leave my mind open for anything. We've got to figure what's best for the club and what's best for him, too. ... It has nothing to do with age. Some of it has to do with experience and at-bats. (Bruce) has come on a course real quick. How many kids go Single-A, Double-A, Triple-A in a year?"

Patterson arrived in camp Tuesday, but he was given no guarantees. Ryan Freel, Norris Hopper and Bruce are all considered candidates for the center field job.

"Basically, I'm just competing," Patterson said. "I'm not here to worry about what this player does or that player does. I believe you compete against yourself. You start worrying about what other players are doing, you lose focus on what you have to do. It's hard enough without putting extra things in the equation."

Patterson said he wasn't worried as the days ticked by and he didn't have a job.

"I didn't worry about it at all," he said. "It was definitely an interesting offseason for me, and a lot other guys, too."

BRM

03-05-2008, 12:05 PM

I thought patterson could be a LH platoon w/ someone like Hopper.. but looking at last year's stats he hit .310 off LHer and .251 off righties ... I only found last years splits.. is smashing LH pitchers something he's consistently done?

For his career, no.

Vs RHP: .264/.306/.425/.731
Vs LHP: .242/.275/.382/.657

hippie07

03-05-2008, 12:24 PM

For his career, no.

Vs RHP: .264/.306/.425/.731
Vs LHP: .242/.275/.382/.657

Well, I'm just guessing because I didn't watch him last year - but from what I've read he got on base a lot better after the all-star break.. maybe he decided to bunt (or just be patient) against LHers and tried to swing for the fences against RHers... I don't know ... but if he could be convinced to "get on base" rather than be a power guy like Dusty talked about in the above article. He could maybe put up similar numbers to what Hopper put up last year.. but, my question is .. is he defense and/or base running better than Hopper???... If not, I don't see how the team is any better off -- I hope we are just because hope springs eternal in spring and I'd like for us to have a decent leadoff hitter, base stealing machine, and superb CF defender... if we can get all those things from Patterson... or Patterson/Hopper... great.

I'm not so sure about a platoon.. I bet as long as Patterson puts up decent offensive #'s .. he might very well get most of the at-bats at CF.

BRM

03-05-2008, 12:26 PM

I think the consensus is that Patterson is a definite upgrade defensively over Hopper and Freel. Hopper and Freel are considered average at best in CF while Patterson is above average, maybe even well above average.

Chip R

03-05-2008, 12:40 PM

Should Dusty or Krivsky be making the decision on Jay Bruce? It sounds to me like Dusty is deciding who makes the roster and I'm not sure that's a good idea. I think the GM should supply the players and the manager should use what he is given. If Dusty is deciding, what's the point of the GM?

Good question. Most of the roster Dusty or Wayne can't do anything about because of contracts. Neither one is going to want to cut Adam Dunn. But I'm sure there are a few players that Dusty's going to have input on. Will he have the final decision? It's hard to say. But he has a 3 year deal and Wayne's on his last year. Plus Dusty's going to be the one managing this team and he has been successful in the past so you could make an argument for him getting his type of players on the roster. If you have Whitey Herzog as a manager and you want him to be successful, you aren't going to saddle him with a bunch of big guys who can't run but can hit the ball a long ways. Otherwise, what's the point of bringing a guy like him in?

Sometimes a manager has a better feel for personnel than a GM does. He's in the clubhouse every day. He knows the personalities and how they mesh. He may believe that Juan Castro doesn't add anything to the Reds while Wayne thinks he's Manos de Oro and since he's already making $1M it'd be silly for him to get paid for doing nothing. And, of course, the opposite could be true too.

RANDY IN INDY

03-05-2008, 12:49 PM

The manager and GM should be working very closely on personnel decisions if a team is to be able to function at its best.

flyer85

03-05-2008, 12:55 PM

The manager and GM should be working very closely on personnel decisions if a team is to be able to function at its best....hopefully they are on the same page because if a roster is constructed in certain manner it is meant to managed in a certain manner.

My guess is that Patterson is a lock for the 25 man roster.

BRM

03-05-2008, 12:58 PM

My guess is that Patterson is a lock for the 25 man roster.

I think he has to essentially go hitless for the spring to not make it.

RANDY IN INDY

03-05-2008, 01:05 PM

I don't see Patterson making the roster as a bad thing at all.

BRM

03-05-2008, 01:06 PM

I don't see Patterson making the roster as a bad thing at all.

I don't think so either, really. I didn't mean to imply that if I did. Quality CF defense is a good thing IMO.

flyer85

03-05-2008, 01:06 PM

I don't see Patterson making the roster as a bad thing at all.nor do I ... wonder who is the odd man out?

BRM

03-05-2008, 01:22 PM

nor do I ... wonder who is the odd man out?

Besides Bruce? I'd say Freel or Hopper one will be traded at some point this spring. I can't see both of them making the squad along with Patterson.

flyer85

03-05-2008, 01:26 PM

Besides Bruce? I'd say Freel or Hopper one will be traded at some point this spring. I can't see both of them making the squad along with Patterson.if Bruce is out(which seems like a lock) ... I can see both Hopper and Freel making the team.

BRM

03-05-2008, 01:35 PM

if Bruce is out(which seems like a lock) ... I can see both Hopper and Freel making the team.

Freel becomes more of a backup infielder at that point? If both make it, no way can they take Castro as well.

CaiGuy

03-05-2008, 01:40 PM

I would guess that Patterson will be the primary CF, while Hopper and Freel become the 4th and 5th OF/Utility guys.

BRM

03-05-2008, 01:42 PM

That would give them a bench of:

Hat/Votto
Keppinger
Freel
Hopper
Valentin

Put Castro there if Gonzalez starts the year on the DL. This assumes Patterson starts and they carry 12 pitchers again. I guess I can see that too.

IslandRed

03-05-2008, 09:44 PM

I wouldn't be surprised, either, to see a trade or another move, depending on how the CF competition plays out, and the SS situation with Gonzalez hurting and his everyday replacement not yet settled. In particular, it wouldn't surprise me to see Hatteberg or Freel swapped for a value equivalent that's more the right-handed-hitting 1B/corner OF type.

Raisor

03-05-2008, 09:50 PM

I wouldn't be surprised, either, to see a trade or another move, depending on how the CF competition plays out, and the SS situation with Gonzalez hurting and his everyday replacement not yet settled. In particular, it wouldn't surprise me to see Hatteberg or Freel swapped for a value equivalent that's more the right-handed-hitting 1B/corner OF type.

Craig Wilson, come on down!

oh..wait.

IslandRed

03-05-2008, 10:02 PM

Craig Wilson, come on down!

oh..wait.

Yep.

Right idea, wrong guy.

GAC

03-06-2008, 09:29 PM

How does Patterson rate defensively in the OF? I know he possesses speed; but other then that, I'm not enthralled with this guy.

Reggie Taylor the Second? :lol:

Who would you rather have, since both are similar in age..... Patterson or Denorfia? Why?

Offensively we can accurately rate how Patterson will probably perform since he's has 8 years of experience. With Denorfia you have less then two.

Falls City Beer

03-06-2008, 09:41 PM

How does Patterson rate defensively in the OF? I know he possesses speed; but other then that, I'm not enthralled with this guy.

Reggie Taylor the Second? :lol:

Who would you rather have, since both are similar in age..... Patterson or Denorfia? Why?

Offensively we can accurately rate how Patterson will probably perform since he's has 8 years of experience. With Denorfia you have less then two.